lexikos wrote: ↑
27 Jul 2019, 04:04
I mean "support" in the sense of ensuring the primary functions of the site work correctly. I doubt there is even one good
reason to exclude IE11 users from use of the current forum platform, putting aside any frivolous new features. We don't need "new web technologies" to run a message board.
As for reasons to support it, that it's still around is enough. I don't know how it is with just the visitors to this forum, but in general it looks like IE's usage share still exceeds Edge
. (Soon enough Edge support will be irrelevant anyway, what with Microsoft implementing Chromium in Edge.)
Well the primary functions work - It doesn't work on pages and topics that have large code boxes.
I assume (0 testing done) that it just that it cannot deal with an excessive amount of HTML tags which is commonly used in modern websites
Of course our forum itself isnot really reliant on modern web technology and nothing we implement on our own is really advanced enough to use any of that.
But of course noone makes highly detailed and special considerations for outdated browsers when adding new features.
Lastly we are far from isolated. Libraries, plugins and just scripts can come from elsewhere - like our code box.
I do not see a simple method of generating a code box that uses significantly less html tags while retaining all the functionality.
We could cut short the anchor tags and make specific span tags more like them or don't use span tags when there is already an anchor tag used for a clickeable syntax element.
Potentially one could employ a canvas to render the contents of a code box, avoiding the need for html tags altogether.
However that in itself is a feat. Mainting all features will be more difficult. Lastly maintaining compatability with all sorts of screenreaders etc. seems extremly difficult.
Doing all that with the goal in mind to support an outdated browser better than normal html tags to will be pretty difficult.
Unless someone can provide a fitting library that we can use as starting point I dont see this happening.
Of course my JS knowledge for optimizations is limited so I might miss some obvious flaws and the equally obvious solutions.
On the other hand offering a second service that is uniquely responsible for handling the sharing of scripts is both feasible, beneficial to all users and would make other long term goals more easily possible.
I hope nnnik and jeeswg can find a way to get along, for at least the good of the community. You both have your fans.
Thank for your kind words.
However I feel like I should point out the following:
A) The fact that I and someone else don't really get along is not really a reason to ban anyone.
B) I am not the only one that doesn't get along with him - I'm just the one that's most apparent.
C) The reason that he doesn't get along with all members of the forum is not the only and not the major part as to why we are discussing this topic.