Technology requirements in browsers

[Vlad Dascalu]

Functionality (basic) should be available to Lynx users.

Considering that, we can do CSS or javascript-only, or AJAX-only 
improvements (we already have such improvements for non-Lynx users: 
images, for example).

Vlad

Luis Villa wrote:
> On 3/1/06, Benton, Kevin <kevin.benton at amd.com> wrote:
>   
>>
>> I'm wondering what others are feeling about this:
>>
>>
>>
>> At what point do we decide to stop supporting browsers that don't have
>> JavaScript/CSS2 support available?  I know that for some, this might sound
>> like a radical idea.  From my perspective, I've begun shifting my focus
>> somewhat from trying to support every browser out there to recognizing that
>> we don't necessarily have to support the oldest technology in our newest
>> versions.  While I think it's fair to say we ought to be able to support at
>> least 98% of the users (not 98% of the browsers) out there; I think that we
>> could do a lot better by not allowing ourselves to get tied to very old
>> technology as we move forward.  I think that at some point, it makes sense
>> to say that we won't support "advanced" Bugzilla features in very old
>> technology (VOT) browsers that don't support JavaScript and CSS2.  That is
>> not to say that we should allow VOT browsers to file and update bugs, but I
>> think it's fair to say that we could do a lot more to make Bugzilla 1) look
>> prettier, and 2) work more intuitively for users if we can say bye-bye to
>> some of the self-imposed limitations.  NeoOffice Bugzilla
>> (http://bugzilla.neooffice.org) is a perfect example from their main page.
>> Some of those menu items at the top would be perfect for JavaScript
>> drop-downs.  News that automatically rotates every n seconds would also be
>> something that would require advanced browser features.  Quick stats could
>> easily be reworked slightly to handle multiple products on mouseover, etc.
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm just thinking out loud and wondering what direction the rest of the
>> group thinks we ought to take based on these items.
>>     
>
> (1) Lots of javascript and CSS stuff is flash for flash's sake, which
> is never good for a serious development tool.
>
> (2) That said, you can do a *lot* of useful stuff in jscript and CSS,
> and I think we should. I once hacked up a dynamically sortable buglist
> that was quite nice, for example, and judicious use of ajax-y
> techniques could greatly improve the usability of the search forms.
>
> Remember that the target audience for bugzilla is primarily
> developers, not the general public*, and developers are usually more
> willing and able to move to newer browsers more quickly. We shouldn't
> shy away from newer tech if it'll make the tool markedly better and
> won't kill too many browsers.
>
> Luis
> * no matter how easy you make the bug submission page :)
>
> -
> To view or change your list settings, click here:
> <http://bugzilla.org/cgi-bin/mj_wwwusr?user=vladd@bugzilla.org>
>
>
>