[horde] Horde 5 - You are using an old, unsupport version of IE.

Wed Nov 7 18:00:50 UTC 2012

Sveiki,

Wednesday, November 7, 2012, 3:46:03 PM, you wrote:

> Zitat von Vilius ?umskas <vilius at lnk.lt>:

>> Sveiki,
>>
>> Wednesday, November 7, 2012, 5:05:13 AM, you wrote:
>>
>>> Quoting Michael M Slusarz <slusarz at horde.org>:
>>
>>>> Quoting Vilius ?umskas <vilius at lnk.lt>:
>>>>
>>>>> As  Horde  no  longer supports older browsers it's probably a good
>>>>> idea  to  add: <meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=9" /> or
>>>>> something  like  that  to  the template code. It makes IE use the best
>>>>> available rendering method.
>>>>
>>>> Shouldn't this be <meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible"
>>>> content="IE=Edge" /> ?  I believe this translates to "use the most
>>>> advanced rendering mode the browser supports".  So that IE10, for
>>>> example, would use the IE10 engine, not fallback to IE9.
>>
>> Ahh yes, the IE10 is out. Then it should be:
>>
>> <meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=10" />
>>
>> This  is a somewhat better solution than IE=edge because when a new  
>> version of
>> IE  will be released, let's say IE11, there is no quarantee that Horde
>> will  be  compatible  with newest engine. And that's why compatibility
>> mode   exist  in the first place, e.i. to give time for developers fix
>> their  applications  *and*  not  break  page  display if user upgraded
>> sooner. So in theory we should first test and only then switch it  
>> to: content="IE=11".

> I don't agree, we don't do this anymore in Horde_Browser or in the  
> test page for PHP versions either. It makes more sense to assume  
> future versions are backward compatible and only adapt if they aren't.

At least in Microsoft world they aren't :) And MSDN documentation says
exactly  that.  It  is  not  recommended to keep IE=edge on production
websites.

But I don't have a big opposition on that.

> So I'm +1 for adding this header.

>>> Reading this:
>>
>>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/jj676917%28v=vs.85%29.aspx
>>
>>> It seems the better solution would be to specify a HTML5 doctype instead:
>>
>>> <!DOCTYPE html>
>>
>>> I believe we are currently outputting XHTML 1.0 Transitional.  So the
>>> real question should be - is there any reason we shouldn't be
>>> declaring as HTML 5?

> When we first had that discussion a few years back, HTML 5 was too  
> early, so we sticked with XHTML (actually we intended to convert to  
> HTML 4.01 back then). I'm fine with moving to HTML 5 with Horde 5.1,  
> because we don't have to change any HTML code for that. And we should
> still stick to XHTML syntax rules. I consider the syntax-laziness of  
> HTML 5 a step back, and XHTML rules are compatible with HTML 5.

>> !doctype  declaration  is  almost  the same as IE=edge. So if we would
>> agree  on  IE=edge, probably,   yes,  the doctype
>> declaration would be a better solution. But
>> someone  has  to  investigate if doctype declaration actually *forces*
>> user's  browser to switch modes. Even if he has Horde website/intranet
>> in  settings to display it in compatibility mode. X-UA-Compatible does
>> this.
>>
>> And  one more thing to consider is that this declaration is only  
>> available from
>> IE9 and newer.   IE8   still  has  to  be forced the other way. But  
>> hopefully we
>> will see less of that browser in the future :)

> IMO we should be using IE=edge right now, and HTML 5 in Horde 5.1.

If  we  still  thinking to support IE7 and IE8 for Horde 5.1 then this
won't  work. HTML5 doctype will force those older browsers into Quirks
Mode.

I  don't  care about IE7, because you can always upgrade to IE8 on XP.
But  not  supporting IE8 for Horde 5.1 sounds like too soon for me (of
course   all   of  this  is based on current situation, time will tell
if  Win8  really  gives a boost at upgrading OS'es and browsers).

-- 
Best regards,
 Vilius