Unfortunately, IE6 (and IE7 as well) are problems that all web sites got to live with. IE6 is still used by about 34% of all web users (according to the latest statistics from thecounter.com), so banning those users or not paying attention to problems they might have with certain website elements is pretty bad, especially considering the fact that we have a mission to deliver our content to everyone, regardless of platform or browser. Testing on those platforms is probably not done enough, simply because most developers and editors are using something else than IE.
-- Hay
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
2009/2/20 Aryeh Gregor Simetrical+wikilist@gmail.com:
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 5:19 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
There are different levels of support. We should certainly make sure things fail gracefully for IE6, but a new feature not working on IE6 shouldn't be a reason not to implement it for everyone else. (I believe that is pretty much the current policy already.)
It depends on the type of feature. For instance, when implementing different icons for certain filetypes on external links in Monobook, I used the [$=foo] CSS selector, knowing it would fail in IE6, because it's not going to hurt anyone if it does. On the other hand, it would still be unacceptable at this point for a significant new feature not to work in IE6. It still has 20% of the market, by some figures I've seen.
I can't see any significant new features causing a problem that wouldn't be dealt with by the "fail gracefully" condition. As long as adding the feature doesn't make things worse for IE6 users (so they can still read and edit the sites), then there isn't a big problem. Of course, if you can cater to IE6 easily, then there is no reason not to.
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l