> > However i support your statement that we should look for 'cheap' fallbacks > so old browsers degrade to something meaningful. E.g. take the simple 'no > script' of HTML - if there are users no having javascript active for some > reason i at least can tell them that the site won't offer its whole > functionality (if any at all).
We do have an `unresolved` attribute which can be placed on any custom element you use. You can style against this attribute (maybe displaying a background image that says 'loading' or 'web component support required'). When Polymer upgrades your element, it will remove this attribute. You can read more about it here: http://www.polymer-project.org/docs/polymer/styling.html#fouc-prevention On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 8:00 AM, Joern Turner <[email protected]> wrote: > That are astonishing and interesting statistics and i very well understand > that you must be cautious which technologies you adapt. On the other hand - > being an open source developer for more than 10 years - i very well > understand Robs' argument. Especially if you try to move things forward > it's hard to get everybody on the train without loosing a lot of speed and > momentum. > > However i support your statement that we should look for 'cheap' fallbacks > so old browsers degrade to something meaningful. E.g. take the simple 'no > script' of HTML - if there are users no having javascript active for some > reason i at least can tell them that the site won't offer its whole > functionality (if any at all). This already makes a big difference as most > users today have an alternative - they don't need necessarily connect with > their aged smartphone browser but can go to their desktop. > > On the other hand i think developers today need to put some pressure on > users to upgrade if they want to offer the latest and greatest. Backward > compat can become a too big burden sometimes and hinder innovation. Maybe > you should probably have a look into how much profit these 'minorities' > actually bring. Wouldn't it be possible that you can raise your profits by > offering a much better (and more fun) interface for all the others? > > Just my 2 cents, > > Joern > > Am Sonntag, 29. Juni 2014 16:15:43 UTC+2 schrieb [email protected]: > >> Thanks Rob and I understand that the Polymer is advancing the future of >> the web. I am just wondering if the best way to reach the future faster is >> not to find a somewhat elegant way to deal with the past (and that's what I >> understand has worked best in the past to advance the web...) >> >> When HTML5 new input tags was introduced I thought it was great how older >> browser would just treat these fields as text input. It really helped adopt >> HTML5's new inputs. Couldn't there be a similar way to achieve this with >> Polymer? >> >> We still get around over *15%* of our traffic coming from older versions >> of major browsers, 2,5% from Opera and Opera Mini, and a little under 1% >> from browsers that I don't know how they would behave (Opera Mini, Opera, >> Ovi Browser, Blackberry, Maxthon, Amazon Silk, Dolfin, PS3, IE with Google >> Frame,...). >> >> So despite my huge enthusiasm to discuss with my team adopting Polymer >> for YouFoot, we can't just cross out 15% of our users and it will probably >> take 3 years for this 15% to become less than 5%, and 5 years to become >> less than 1%. >> >> It would have been particularly great to adopt it to create a more >> consistant look across web and mobile devices, make interfaces more >> beautiful, code leaner... >> >> --------------------------- >> >> *Internet Explorer:* >> Speaking of IE which amount for 15% of our sessions: 33% of these are >> from IE 9 or previous (almost half is from IE9 and and half from IE8, with >> a small amount from IE7). Fun fact: we even have a few users connecting >> from IE5 and IE4 apparently! >> >> *Firefox:* >> For us Firefox represent 22% of browser usage. While you are right that >> it's generally better, you'd be surprised to see we get 205 different >> versions of Firefox. While 80% of it are from Firefox 30 and 29 we also >> have almost 1% on version 12, 0,5% on version 11, etc... There might be 5% >> of Firefox users on versions below version 10 (with version 3 and 4 being >> pretty popular still). >> >> *Chrome* >> Chrome sees the most usage with 48,8% but while 79% are using version 35, >> the next version that is most used is version 1,5 with 2,4% of Chrome >> users. There are more than 1000 different versions being used although 990 >> versions probably amount to less than 2% >> >> *Safari:* >> Safari is only 2,9% of our usage. Among that 7% are using Safari 5 or >> older. >> > Follow Polymer on Google+: plus.google.com/107187849809354688692 > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Polymer" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/fc229dc8-7f22-4c1a-8154-9b798517d2a5%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/fc229dc8-7f22-4c1a-8154-9b798517d2a5%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > Follow Polymer on Google+: plus.google.com/107187849809354688692 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Polymer" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/polymer-dev/CAJj5OwC%3DDGFDJfyVH4oG4eW%3DS%2BL6CzRhNM6JgL2-E8QEzxNTXg%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
