The point I was trying to make, is that standards should be followed on both sides, both the browser and client side scripting. Then these issues wouldn't occur. Custom javascript extensions and CSS just muddy the water.
Most of the problems I see with modern web development stem from people just developing for their preferred browser of choice, using whatever weird formatting tricks they need for that browser and then call it "done". When professional companies release webapps and say thing like "This only works on Chrome" strikes me as incredibly lazy.
When I write sites/webapps for clients these days, I tend to target IE11, as some of their machines are still on Windows 7, and it's what they use. Using nothing more than the standards, with no unnecessary frameworks bolted on (I'm looking at you jQuery) I can deliver responsive sites that work across all the browsers without tweaking anything.
I did write something for a school not too long ago that had to support IE9. But, using that as my base for development - rather than trying to do it in chrome or firefox, it "magically" worked for newer version and other browsers.
Perhaps if they made it so that developers could specify the max scripting language version to run, at least for debugging, it would make things easier. Maybe make it so that non-standard extensions had to be enabled with some scripting or metatag first.
This means, that there will FINALLY be no more coding for (BROKEN FUCKING BROWSER X, Y or Z)
Never had any problems supporting cross browsers, stick to the standard in the lowest common denominator you want to support and don't use proprietary extensions and you'll be fine. If you mean exclusively CSS layouts, then graceful fallback should always be an option. If you want to support the older browsers, you'll have to allow for people still using old versions of other browsers as well.
Slashdot Mirror
The point I was trying to make, is that standards should be followed on both sides, both the browser and client side scripting. Then these issues wouldn't occur. Custom javascript extensions and CSS just muddy the water. Most of the problems I see with modern web development stem from people just developing for their preferred browser of choice, using whatever weird formatting tricks they need for that browser and then call it "done". When professional companies release webapps and say thing like "This only works on Chrome" strikes me as incredibly lazy. When I write sites/webapps for clients these days, I tend to target IE11, as some of their machines are still on Windows 7, and it's what they use. Using nothing more than the standards, with no unnecessary frameworks bolted on (I'm looking at you jQuery) I can deliver responsive sites that work across all the browsers without tweaking anything. I did write something for a school not too long ago that had to support IE9. But, using that as my base for development - rather than trying to do it in chrome or firefox, it "magically" worked for newer version and other browsers. Perhaps if they made it so that developers could specify the max scripting language version to run, at least for debugging, it would make things easier. Maybe make it so that non-standard extensions had to be enabled with some scripting or metatag first.
This means, that there will FINALLY be no more coding for (BROKEN FUCKING BROWSER X, Y or Z)
Never had any problems supporting cross browsers, stick to the standard in the lowest common denominator you want to support and don't use proprietary extensions and you'll be fine. If you mean exclusively CSS layouts, then graceful fallback should always be an option. If you want to support the older browsers, you'll have to allow for people still using old versions of other browsers as well.