[WSG] Browser Backwards Compatibility -- How far back?

2009-03-14 Thread Brett Patterson
Hi all,

I was just reading from a book that talked about some code that would not
work in Internet Explorer 3.0, but would in Internet Explorer 4.0 and later,
and Netscape Navigator 3.0 and later. This brought up a question that I
could not find direct and consistent answers while searching the
Internet...so, how far back would it be acceptable to design for, when it
comes to backwards browser compatibility? I have been told from some sites,
that Internet Explorer 5.0/later and Netscape Navigator 4.0/later, as well
as Firefox 1.5/later and Opera 6.0/later. Is this correct?

--
Brett P.


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] Browser Backwards Compatibility -- How far back?

2009-03-14 Thread Christian Montoya
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Brett Patterson
inspiron.patters...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi all,

 I was just reading from a book that talked about some code that would not
 work in Internet Explorer 3.0, but would in Internet Explorer 4.0 and later,
 and Netscape Navigator 3.0 and later. This brought up a question that I
 could not find direct and consistent answers while searching the
 Internet...so, how far back would it be acceptable to design for, when it
 comes to backwards browser compatibility? I have been told from some sites,
 that Internet Explorer 5.0/later and Netscape Navigator 4.0/later, as well
 as Firefox 1.5/later and Opera 6.0/later. Is this correct?

Yahoo! has a good chart for browser support here:
http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/articles/gbs/

This is not so much which browsers they support, but more which they
test against and *guarantee* support for. So a Yahoo! site mike also
work with IE 5.0, but they won't lose sleep if it doesn't.

I think it's safe to say that if your client wants to guarantee
support for an older browser not in this chart, then you should charge
extra.

-- 
--
Christian Montoya
mappdev.com :: christianmontoya.net


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***



[WSG] Testing in IE7 both Win XP and Vista

2009-03-14 Thread Peter Mount

Hello

Is it necessary to test web sites in IE7 on both Win XP and Vista? Or  
is it good enough to just test in IE7 on Vista?


I'm just worried about IE7 rendering differently on Win XP compared to  
Vista.


Thanks

--
Peter Mount
Web Development for Business
Mobile: 0411 276602
i...@petermount.com
http://www.petermount.com



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***



Re: [WSG] Testing in IE7 both Win XP and Vista

2009-03-14 Thread Overt Strategy Consulting

Hi there Peter,

From what I see, it is safe to test on just the one. Running Vista side 
by side on two PC's


Peter Mount wrote:

Hello

Is it necessary to test web sites in IE7 on both Win XP and Vista? Or is 
it good enough to just test in IE7 on Vista?


I'm just worried about IE7 rendering differently on Win XP compared to 
Vista.


Thanks

--
Peter Mount
Web Development for Business
Mobile: 0411 276602
i...@petermount.com
http://www.petermount.com



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***





No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.13/2001 - Release Date: 03/14/09 06:54:00





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***begin:vcard
fn:Schalk Neethling
n:Neethling;Schalk
org:Overt Strategy Consulting
adr:Florauna;;Berg ave 642;Pretoria;Gauteng;0182;South Africa
email;internet:sch...@overtstrategyconsulting.com
title:President
tel;work:+27125468436
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://www.overtstrategyconsulting.com
version:2.1
end:vcard




Re: [WSG] Testing in IE7 both Win XP and Vista

2009-03-14 Thread Overt Strategy Consulting

Hi there Peter,

From what I see, it is safe to test on just the one. Running Vista and 
XP side by side on two PC's


Peter Mount wrote:

Hello

Is it necessary to test web sites in IE7 on both Win XP and Vista? Or is 
it good enough to just test in IE7 on Vista?


I'm just worried about IE7 rendering differently on Win XP compared to 
Vista.


Thanks

--
Peter Mount
Web Development for Business
Mobile: 0411 276602
i...@petermount.com
http://www.petermount.com



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***





No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.13/2001 - Release Date: 03/14/09 06:54:00





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***begin:vcard
fn:Schalk Neethling
n:Neethling;Schalk
org:Overt Strategy Consulting
adr:Florauna;;Berg ave 642;Pretoria;Gauteng;0182;South Africa
email;internet:sch...@overtstrategyconsulting.com
title:President
tel;work:+27125468436
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://www.overtstrategyconsulting.com
version:2.1
end:vcard




RE: [WSG] Browser Backwards Compatibility -- How far back?

2009-03-14 Thread Rick Faircloth
I think you're perspective is correct, Christian.

I don't even test in browsers that are two generations removed from the
current release.  Clients just have to update their browsers.

However, if a client insists on supporting IE 5 with IE 7 out, yes, it
will cost them extra.

Rick

 -Original Message-
 From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org]
 On Behalf Of Christian Montoya
 Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2009 4:59 PM
 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
 Subject: Re: [WSG] Browser Backwards Compatibility -- How far back?
 
 On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Brett Patterson
 inspiron.patters...@gmail.com wrote:
  Hi all,
 
  I was just reading from a book that talked about some code that would
 not
  work in Internet Explorer 3.0, but would in Internet Explorer 4.0 and
 later,
  and Netscape Navigator 3.0 and later. This brought up a question that
 I
  could not find direct and consistent answers while searching the
  Internet...so, how far back would it be acceptable to design for,
 when it
  comes to backwards browser compatibility? I have been told from some
 sites,
  that Internet Explorer 5.0/later and Netscape Navigator 4.0/later, as
 well
  as Firefox 1.5/later and Opera 6.0/later. Is this correct?
 
 Yahoo! has a good chart for browser support here:
 http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/articles/gbs/
 
 This is not so much which browsers they support, but more which they
 test against and *guarantee* support for. So a Yahoo! site mike also
 work with IE 5.0, but they won't lose sleep if it doesn't.
 
 I think it's safe to say that if your client wants to guarantee
 support for an older browser not in this chart, then you should charge
 extra.
 
 --
 --
 Christian Montoya
 mappdev.com :: christianmontoya.net
 
 
 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
 ***
 
 
 No virus found in this incoming message.
 Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
 Version: 8.5.278 / Virus Database: 270.11.12/1998 - Release Date:
 03/14/09 06:54:00



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***



Re: [WSG] Browser Backwards Compatibility -- How far back?

2009-03-14 Thread nedlud
How old was this book? Check the publication date and add 1 year
(cause it can take that long for a book to get edited etc before it
goes into publication) and then consider what browsers were arounf
when the book was written. That may help understand why it's so behind
the times.

The web is rapidly evolving, which make treeware pretty bad at keeping up.

L.

On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Rick Faircloth
r...@whitestonemedia.com wrote:
 I think you're perspective is correct, Christian.

 I don't even test in browsers that are two generations removed from the
 current release.  Clients just have to update their browsers.

 However, if a client insists on supporting IE 5 with IE 7 out, yes, it
 will cost them extra.

 Rick

 -Original Message-
 From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org]
 On Behalf Of Christian Montoya
 Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2009 4:59 PM
 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
 Subject: Re: [WSG] Browser Backwards Compatibility -- How far back?

 On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Brett Patterson
 inspiron.patters...@gmail.com wrote:
  Hi all,
 
  I was just reading from a book that talked about some code that would
 not
  work in Internet Explorer 3.0, but would in Internet Explorer 4.0 and
 later,
  and Netscape Navigator 3.0 and later. This brought up a question that
 I
  could not find direct and consistent answers while searching the
  Internet...so, how far back would it be acceptable to design for,
 when it
  comes to backwards browser compatibility? I have been told from some
 sites,
  that Internet Explorer 5.0/later and Netscape Navigator 4.0/later, as
 well
  as Firefox 1.5/later and Opera 6.0/later. Is this correct?

 Yahoo! has a good chart for browser support here:
 http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/articles/gbs/

 This is not so much which browsers they support, but more which they
 test against and *guarantee* support for. So a Yahoo! site mike also
 work with IE 5.0, but they won't lose sleep if it doesn't.

 I think it's safe to say that if your client wants to guarantee
 support for an older browser not in this chart, then you should charge
 extra.

 --
 --
 Christian Montoya
 mappdev.com :: christianmontoya.net


 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
 ***


 No virus found in this incoming message.
 Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
 Version: 8.5.278 / Virus Database: 270.11.12/1998 - Release Date:
 03/14/09 06:54:00



 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
 ***




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***



Re: [WSG] Browser Backwards Compatibility -- How far back?

2009-03-14 Thread nedlud
How old was this book? Check the publication date and add 1 year
(cause it can take that long for a book to get edited etc before it
goes into publication) and then consider what browsers were arounf
when the book was written. That may help understand why it's so behind
the times.

The web is rapidly evolving, which make treeware pretty bad at keeping up.

L.

On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Rick Faircloth
r...@whitestonemedia.com wrote:
 I think you're perspective is correct, Christian.

 I don't even test in browsers that are two generations removed from the
 current release.  Clients just have to update their browsers.

 However, if a client insists on supporting IE 5 with IE 7 out, yes, it
 will cost them extra.

 Rick

 -Original Message-
 From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org]
 On Behalf Of Christian Montoya
 Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2009 4:59 PM
 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
 Subject: Re: [WSG] Browser Backwards Compatibility -- How far back?

 On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Brett Patterson
 inspiron.patters...@gmail.com wrote:
  Hi all,
 
  I was just reading from a book that talked about some code that would
 not
  work in Internet Explorer 3.0, but would in Internet Explorer 4.0 and
 later,
  and Netscape Navigator 3.0 and later. This brought up a question that
 I
  could not find direct and consistent answers while searching the
  Internet...so, how far back would it be acceptable to design for,
 when it
  comes to backwards browser compatibility? I have been told from some
 sites,
  that Internet Explorer 5.0/later and Netscape Navigator 4.0/later, as
 well
  as Firefox 1.5/later and Opera 6.0/later. Is this correct?

 Yahoo! has a good chart for browser support here:
 http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/articles/gbs/

 This is not so much which browsers they support, but more which they
 test against and *guarantee* support for. So a Yahoo! site mike also
 work with IE 5.0, but they won't lose sleep if it doesn't.

 I think it's safe to say that if your client wants to guarantee
 support for an older browser not in this chart, then you should charge
 extra.

 --
 --
 Christian Montoya
 mappdev.com :: christianmontoya.net


 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
 ***


 No virus found in this incoming message.
 Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
 Version: 8.5.278 / Virus Database: 270.11.12/1998 - Release Date:
 03/14/09 06:54:00



 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
 ***




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***