Re: testing with browserstack. IE11 bad surprise

[Harbs]

The only exception to the IE support is MDL Slider. The features needed for 
that are sketchy at best on IE…

> On Apr 8, 2018, at 1:20 PM, Carlos Rovira  wrote:
> 
> Hi Alex,
> 
> 
> 2018-04-08 7:53 GMT+02:00 Alex Harui :
> 
>> Hi Carlos,
>> 
>> I think you missed my point and main question.  The question is: Does MDL
>> and Bootstrap support IE?  If so, then they have found a way to customize
>> Button.
> 
> 
> MDL supports IE10-11 and in some way IE9
> 
> 
> 
>>  Seems like we should be able to do the same, but maybe it won't
>> be the Jewel theme.  It might be something else, maybe folks who need IE
>> should just use our MDL support.
>> 
>> 
> MDL is an option but I think people coming to Royale will not come to use
> MDL but
> to use a full royale UI set that can have it's own way to show things with
> different faces, styles and skins.
> Or at least I don't see us getting an space in actual front-end tech out
> there as an MDL-facilitator.
> MDL is a library that proves what Royale is capable, but don't think in it
> as the real and main path.
> 
> 
>> The point is that IE probably has MS support through 2025.  It will likely
>> fade to insignificant numbers among folks who get to choose which browser
>> they want to use.  But IE is likely going to live on through 2025 as a
>> "terminal" for enterprise mission critical applications.  Otherwise, I
>> think MS would have already announced a true phase out of IE.  IMO, Royale
>> cannot ignore the "terminal" apps.  That is where Flex was winning back in
>> the Adobe days.  Getting a big enterprise Adobe Flex customer who still
>> has a Flex app to use Royale in IE would be a huge win for Royale.  But
>> again, it doesn't have to be Jewel.  But it might be nice if it looked
>> better than just Basic components.
>> 
>> 
> Ok, if IE is so important, we should do something similar to MDL to support
> it.
> Maybe some parallel css to target that browsers and recreates in some way
> how it looks in the rest. Don't know how it works right now, but I'll try
> to investigate
> and see how this could be possible.
> 
> 
> [1] https://getmdl.io/faq/index.html#browser-support
> [2] https://github.com/google/material-design-lite/#browser-support
> 
> -- 
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira

Re: testing with browserstack. IE11 bad surprise

[Carlos Rovira]

Hi Alex,


2018-04-08 7:53 GMT+02:00 Alex Harui :

> Hi Carlos,
>
> I think you missed my point and main question.  The question is: Does MDL
> and Bootstrap support IE?  If so, then they have found a way to customize
> Button.


MDL supports IE10-11 and in some way IE9



>   Seems like we should be able to do the same, but maybe it won't
> be the Jewel theme.  It might be something else, maybe folks who need IE
> should just use our MDL support.
>
>
MDL is an option but I think people coming to Royale will not come to use
MDL but
to use a full royale UI set that can have it's own way to show things with
different faces, styles and skins.
Or at least I don't see us getting an space in actual front-end tech out
there as an MDL-facilitator.
MDL is a library that proves what Royale is capable, but don't think in it
as the real and main path.


> The point is that IE probably has MS support through 2025.  It will likely
> fade to insignificant numbers among folks who get to choose which browser
> they want to use.  But IE is likely going to live on through 2025 as a
> "terminal" for enterprise mission critical applications.  Otherwise, I
> think MS would have already announced a true phase out of IE.  IMO, Royale
> cannot ignore the "terminal" apps.  That is where Flex was winning back in
> the Adobe days.  Getting a big enterprise Adobe Flex customer who still
> has a Flex app to use Royale in IE would be a huge win for Royale.  But
> again, it doesn't have to be Jewel.  But it might be nice if it looked
> better than just Basic components.
>
>
Ok, if IE is so important, we should do something similar to MDL to support
it.
Maybe some parallel css to target that browsers and recreates in some way
how it looks in the rest. Don't know how it works right now, but I'll try
to investigate
and see how this could be possible.


[1] https://getmdl.io/faq/index.html#browser-support
[2] https://github.com/google/material-design-lite/#browser-support

-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira

Re: testing with browserstack. IE11 bad surprise

[Alex Harui]

Hi Carlos, 

I think you missed my point and main question.  The question is: Does MDL
and Bootstrap support IE?  If so, then they have found a way to customize
Button.  Seems like we should be able to do the same, but maybe it won't
be the Jewel theme.  It might be something else, maybe folks who need IE
should just use our MDL support.

The point is that IE probably has MS support through 2025.  It will likely
fade to insignificant numbers among folks who get to choose which browser
they want to use.  But IE is likely going to live on through 2025 as a
"terminal" for enterprise mission critical applications.  Otherwise, I
think MS would have already announced a true phase out of IE.  IMO, Royale
cannot ignore the "terminal" apps.  That is where Flex was winning back in
the Adobe days.  Getting a big enterprise Adobe Flex customer who still
has a Flex app to use Royale in IE would be a huge win for Royale.  But
again, it doesn't have to be Jewel.  But it might be nice if it looked
better than just Basic components.

My 2 cents,
-Alex

On 4/7/18, 9:47 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
 wrote:

>Hi Alex,
>
>I think is better to show you IE11 rendering [1]
>
>I think the image is self explanatory. I didn't analyze it already, maybe
>is some huge problem that makes it totally broken, but if not, if I need
>to
>have a complete rendering only for IE11 for each control and component we
>have, I think simply doesn't worth it.
>
>I don't want to give up with this already, maybe we can find some easy way
>to deal with this, but I want to comment it here so we can have it in
>mind.
>
>Depending of the effort implied, other variables to have in mind is the
>scope of this browser over time. We have deprecated already IE8, IE9 and
>IE10, one for year (more or less). If things makes IE11 be almost in no
>use
>in a year, spend lots of time to get that concrete version of IE working
>will be a huge waste of time.
>
>Let's analyze more the situation and I'm sure the right way to proceed
>will
>emerge in some days...
>
>Thanks
>
>
>[1] 
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsnag.gy%2
>FdOgomt.jpg=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C713cce522f334b96532208d59c
>a75127%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636587164837567932
>ta=STfpIPB8inXDym12jvGyOPXzFMMvGFCjdG7I2eMR7Y0%3D=0
>
>2018-04-07 17:10 GMT+02:00 Alex Harui :
>
>> IMO, we need Royale to work on IE11.  It does not mean that Jewel must
>> work on IE11, but it would be nice if some theme did, other than Basic.
>>
>> It turns out that my colleagues can't be sure of their data since IE was
>> mostly being used for intranet apps in large enterprises, but I think IE
>> is being kept around for those large enterprises who are leveraging the
>> "plug-in" capabilities of IE.  And I believe that Royale can be
>>attractive
>> to those enterprises.
>>
>> There is a difference between browsers that folks use for browsing the
>>web
>> and the app that is used in a mission critical app for the front end.  I
>> think MS is saying to use Edge for the first case, but IE is going to be
>> around for many more years for the second case.
>>
>> Does MDL and Bootstrap work on IE?  If so, if you can spend a day
>>figuring
>> out why IE11 doesn't work and come up with a simpler variant that does
>> work, I think that would benefit Royale.
>>
>> My 2 cents,
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 4/7/18, 12:42 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos
>>Rovira"
>>  wrote:
>>
>> >Hi,
>> >
>> >since I'm on Mac I was blind to Microsoft browsers.
>> >I was testing mainly with Chrome (since is the most used) and Safari
>> >(since
>> >is what I use to use).
>> >I have installed Firefox, but I was not testing in a day by day basis.
>> >Never used Opera and Yandex since I doesn't think as relevant
>> >
>> >For me Browserstack is mostly to test IE11 and Edge, and I found that
>> >while
>> >Edge has some issues (and Firefox too), both can be fixed for Jewel
>> >
>> >But the surprise was IE11 this browser is not even near of what it
>> >should show, so taking into account that IE is facing its extinction I
>> >don't think I should
>> >put hours in make that browser work at all. For me IE is the piece of
>> >software we should help to be death and buried, since if it's not
>>capable
>> >of rendering
>> >just a simple button right without lots of hacks, don't want to imagine
>> >what other horrors it deserve to us in this journey.
>> >
>> >It's clear that today IE11 has still an important demographic, but in a
>> >year I expect to be cut in favor of Edge that is the MS bet for the
>> >future.
>> >For me it's not aceptable to need lots of work for only one browser (an
>> >version), when users have Chrome, Firefox, Opera, Safari and Yandex and
>> >even more
>> >
>> >To see what I refer I think you should take a test of 

Re: testing with browserstack. IE11 bad surprise

[Carlos Rovira]

Hi Alex,

I think is better to show you IE11 rendering [1]

I think the image is self explanatory. I didn't analyze it already, maybe
is some huge problem that makes it totally broken, but if not, if I need to
have a complete rendering only for IE11 for each control and component we
have, I think simply doesn't worth it.

I don't want to give up with this already, maybe we can find some easy way
to deal with this, but I want to comment it here so we can have it in mind.

Depending of the effort implied, other variables to have in mind is the
scope of this browser over time. We have deprecated already IE8, IE9 and
IE10, one for year (more or less). If things makes IE11 be almost in no use
in a year, spend lots of time to get that concrete version of IE working
will be a huge waste of time.

Let's analyze more the situation and I'm sure the right way to proceed will
emerge in some days...

Thanks


[1] https://snag.gy/dOgomt.jpg

2018-04-07 17:10 GMT+02:00 Alex Harui :

> IMO, we need Royale to work on IE11.  It does not mean that Jewel must
> work on IE11, but it would be nice if some theme did, other than Basic.
>
> It turns out that my colleagues can't be sure of their data since IE was
> mostly being used for intranet apps in large enterprises, but I think IE
> is being kept around for those large enterprises who are leveraging the
> "plug-in" capabilities of IE.  And I believe that Royale can be attractive
> to those enterprises.
>
> There is a difference between browsers that folks use for browsing the web
> and the app that is used in a mission critical app for the front end.  I
> think MS is saying to use Edge for the first case, but IE is going to be
> around for many more years for the second case.
>
> Does MDL and Bootstrap work on IE?  If so, if you can spend a day figuring
> out why IE11 doesn't work and come up with a simpler variant that does
> work, I think that would benefit Royale.
>
> My 2 cents,
> -Alex
>
> On 4/7/18, 12:42 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
>  wrote:
>
> >Hi,
> >
> >since I'm on Mac I was blind to Microsoft browsers.
> >I was testing mainly with Chrome (since is the most used) and Safari
> >(since
> >is what I use to use).
> >I have installed Firefox, but I was not testing in a day by day basis.
> >Never used Opera and Yandex since I doesn't think as relevant
> >
> >For me Browserstack is mostly to test IE11 and Edge, and I found that
> >while
> >Edge has some issues (and Firefox too), both can be fixed for Jewel
> >
> >But the surprise was IE11 this browser is not even near of what it
> >should show, so taking into account that IE is facing its extinction I
> >don't think I should
> >put hours in make that browser work at all. For me IE is the piece of
> >software we should help to be death and buried, since if it's not capable
> >of rendering
> >just a simple button right without lots of hacks, don't want to imagine
> >what other horrors it deserve to us in this journey.
> >
> >It's clear that today IE11 has still an important demographic, but in a
> >year I expect to be cut in favor of Edge that is the MS bet for the
> >future.
> >For me it's not aceptable to need lots of work for only one browser (an
> >version), when users have Chrome, Firefox, Opera, Safari and Yandex and
> >even more
> >
> >To see what I refer I think you should take a test of JewelExample in
> >different browsers. All behaves more or less the same. I see some issues
> >in
> >Edge and Firefox
> >to fix, but if you see the example in IE11 you will literally cry...
> >
> >So what do you think?
> >
> >--
> >Carlos Rovira
> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2
> >Fcarlosrovira=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7Cfb664630749a424f327708d5
> >9c5b39e8%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> 7C636586838017132240
> >data=cCyvy2Hde5H4Rrs%2F75vMKty9ZvMlJxeqi4LSRKkzRjU%3D=0
>
>


-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira

Re: testing with browserstack. IE11 bad surprise

[Alex Harui]

IMO, we need Royale to work on IE11.  It does not mean that Jewel must
work on IE11, but it would be nice if some theme did, other than Basic.

It turns out that my colleagues can't be sure of their data since IE was
mostly being used for intranet apps in large enterprises, but I think IE
is being kept around for those large enterprises who are leveraging the
"plug-in" capabilities of IE.  And I believe that Royale can be attractive
to those enterprises.

There is a difference between browsers that folks use for browsing the web
and the app that is used in a mission critical app for the front end.  I
think MS is saying to use Edge for the first case, but IE is going to be
around for many more years for the second case.

Does MDL and Bootstrap work on IE?  If so, if you can spend a day figuring
out why IE11 doesn't work and come up with a simpler variant that does
work, I think that would benefit Royale.

My 2 cents,
-Alex

On 4/7/18, 12:42 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
 wrote:

>Hi,
>
>since I'm on Mac I was blind to Microsoft browsers.
>I was testing mainly with Chrome (since is the most used) and Safari
>(since
>is what I use to use).
>I have installed Firefox, but I was not testing in a day by day basis.
>Never used Opera and Yandex since I doesn't think as relevant
>
>For me Browserstack is mostly to test IE11 and Edge, and I found that
>while
>Edge has some issues (and Firefox too), both can be fixed for Jewel
>
>But the surprise was IE11 this browser is not even near of what it
>should show, so taking into account that IE is facing its extinction I
>don't think I should
>put hours in make that browser work at all. For me IE is the piece of
>software we should help to be death and buried, since if it's not capable
>of rendering
>just a simple button right without lots of hacks, don't want to imagine
>what other horrors it deserve to us in this journey.
>
>It's clear that today IE11 has still an important demographic, but in a
>year I expect to be cut in favor of Edge that is the MS bet for the
>future.
>For me it's not aceptable to need lots of work for only one browser (an
>version), when users have Chrome, Firefox, Opera, Safari and Yandex and
>even more
>
>To see what I refer I think you should take a test of JewelExample in
>different browsers. All behaves more or less the same. I see some issues
>in
>Edge and Firefox
>to fix, but if you see the example in IE11 you will literally cry...
>
>So what do you think?
>
>-- 
>Carlos Rovira
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2
>Fcarlosrovira=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cfb664630749a424f327708d5
>9c5b39e8%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636586838017132240
>data=cCyvy2Hde5H4Rrs%2F75vMKty9ZvMlJxeqi4LSRKkzRjU%3D=0