On 4/18/17, 3:50 PM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>Hi, > >> Because the user has choices (this is not required code that everybody >> must use) 80% is good enough for me. > >Again than mean that 20% of people using the application would see dates >in the wrong format. Depending on the application they would get >birthdays wrong or show up to meetings on the wrong day (and month). Well, who is in the 20% that will see dates in the wrong format? Are the likely customers of FlexJS this year? Next year? Won't the 20% be much closer to zero in two years? Could those who need to serve that 20% use the SWF version? Also, is there some other code we could add that makes the 20% much less? Like looking at navigator.language and then guessing based on that? That's the advantage of beads. We can offer different kinds of implementations for different needs. > >Each to their own but I don’t think that's a feature I would use as it >would cause numerous user complaints and confusion. > >i thought we were aiming for all browsers that supported es5 as the >minimum browser spec? I guess optional beads may decide to support a >narrower set of browsers but if they do IMO they should come with very >big warnings. We are trying to keep IE9 as the lowest version, but different beads can have different requirements. There is an HTML5 SWC that requires HTML5 browser support. Not a big deal to create something that relies on IE11. And that's why I am still pushing for SWF equivalence. It makes it possible to deploy the app on IE<9 if you need to since most old browsers support Flash. It's ok if you don't want to do it. Some other volunteer can. -Alex
