Some excellent research for web developers: find out which unicode characters have the widest support—release useful for choosing icons.
I really like Scott’s approach to defining what “support” means in terms of browsers—it makes a lot sense to break things down to the component level.
A good explanation of the litany of woes that comes from Internet Explorer 8 being the highest that users of Windows XP can upgrade to. It’s a particularly woeful situation if you are a web developer attempting to provide parity. But there is hope on the horizon:
2013 will see the culmination of all these issues; support for IE 8 will drop of rapidly, users of XP will find an increasingly broken web, the cost of building software in XP organisations will increase.
Well, I guess this is one way of encouraging people to upgrade their browser.
I think I might volunteer my services.
We don’t support Internet Explorer, and we’re calling that a feature | Tips for Freelancers on Time Tracking and Invoicing | Paydirt Blog
This is the absolutely worst way to think about browser support: because the design doesn’t render “pixel perfect” (whatever that means) in a browser, that browser is blocked from accessing content. This is completely unnecessary and shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the web’s greatest feature: progressive enhancement.
This seems like a sensible way of separating capable browsers from legacy browsers: if the browser supports querySelector, localStorage and addEventListener, you’re good to go.
An in-depth look at the BBC News mobile testing process. I think it’s great that people are sharing this kind of information.
A great post that discusses exactly what we mean when we talk about “supporting” different browsers.
A very useful site for checking browser support for CSS features. The test cases are really handy and the site gets extra bonus points for not calling itself “HTML5” anything.
Brad is on a roll. He knocks it out of the park again, this time talking about the difference between supporting the huge range of mobile browsers out there compared to trying to optimise for them.
A damning indictment on the lack of any upgrade path for most Android phones. It’s disgusting that most customers have contracts that are longer than the life cycle of their phone’s operating system (and crucially for me; their browser).
Paul paints a grim picture of our future support nightmares with multiple Internet Explorers, each one with multiple buggy “compatibility” modes.
Mobile HTML5 - compatibility tables for iPhone, Android, BlackBerry, Symbian, iPad and other mobile devices
This just launched at the Breaking Development conference: another site that uses the term HTML5 to include CSS and Ajax. Still, despite its inaccurate nomenclature, it’s a useful compatibility table of device support in mobile browsers.
A rather vicious evaluation of browser support for the audio element and the audio API. It is divided up into:
- Browsers From Companies That Actually Care About HTML5 Audio
- Browsers From Companies That Hate the Web Enough to Not Support Ogg/Vorbis, but do Have an Audio Tag So They Can Say They Have an Audio Tag (Seriously, Fuck You)
- Browsers That Say They Support HTML5 Audio But Actually Don’t Support HTML5 Audio
A very handy page for showing HTML5 form element support in your browser.
A document outlining browser support standards for bbc.co.uk
A comprehensive list of all the CSS properties supported in Safari including "a number of properties that are not supported for developer use."
Read it and weep (for joy). The updated graded browser support table from Yahoo! "Termination of A-grade Support, IE5.5, Win"
A great bit of geek detective work.
Hilarious tech support animation.