On what browsers will the jQuery Formance.js library work, and on what browsers will it not work.
https://github.com/omarshammas/jquery.formance
Given it's a jQuery library, the compatibility should be the same as jQuery itself. The Getting Started example refers to jQuery 1.8.3, which supports:
IE 6+
the 2 most recent stable versions of Chrome
the 2 most recent stable versions of Firefox
Safari 5.1+
the 2 most recent stable versions of Opera, and 12.1x
iOS 6.0+
Android 4.0+
Related
There is library Resumable.js that is:
a JavaScript library providing multiple simultaneous, stable and resumable uploads via the HTML5 File API. The library is designed to introduce fault-tolerance into the upload of large files through HTTP.
but according to Resumable.js site:
Resumable.js does not have any external dependencies other the HTML5 File API. This is relied on for the ability to chunk files into smaller pieces. Currently, this means that support is limited to Firefox 4+ and Chrome 11+
Sometimes developers do not immediately update documentation. Are there any changes at the moment: does Resumable.js support resumable uploading for IE v11 and Windows 10 Edge?
According to their current documentation, they support all major browsers, including Internet Explorer 10+ (Github Resumable.js):
Resumable.js does not have any external dependencies other than the
HTML5 File API. This is relied on for the ability to chunk files into
smaller pieces. Currently, this means that support is widely available
in to Firefox 4+, Chrome 11+, Safari 6+ and Internet Explorer 10+.
Their documentation doesn't say anything about Opera, but it mentions that the only Resumable.js dependency is the HTML5 File API.
Here's a link to the Opera 2.8 documentation, regarding the implementation of the File API, so it should work:
W3C File API support in Opera Presto 2.8
I just built a very simple add-on for Firefox, but it's only compatible with FF 8+. I'd like to make a version that's compatible with FF 3.6 and FF 4+. Is there an SDK for those versions I can use to create/compile a version that'll work with those versions?
No, even Add-on SDK 1.0 marked the add-ons as only compatible with Firefox 4.0b7 and higher. The main reason is that Firefox 3.6 didn't support installing add-ons without a restart and developing an add-on that will use the "conventional" approach in Firefox 3.6 and install without a restart in Firefox 4 and higher is pretty complicated. There are other issues with Firefox 3.6 as well. So your options are:
Just ignore Firefox 3.6. This should be the best course of action given that this Firefox branch will become unsupported soon - its already low user count will be significantly reduced again.
Create a classic extension, without using the SDK. This might be non-trivial depending on what your extension does, and you will most likely lose the ability to install without restart (as I said above, keeping it while being compatible with Firefox 3.6 is very non-trivial).
Use a pre-release Add-on SDK version, e.g. Add-on SDK 0.9. The differences to current SDK versions might be insignificant enough for your extension to work but you should expect bugs and issues due to browser changes since this SDK was released (it lists Firefox 4.0b6 as maximal supported version).
As I read more on the use of webdriver/firefox, I am getting the impression that there serious issues regarding different versions - specifically that when a new version of FF comes out, a new version of WD is needed as well...
Am I reading this correctly?
If so, does the same problem exist with other browsers?
This is a worry for me because my clients may have different versions of FF, and because the app they get from me is compiled - which means I would need to send them an updated app every time FF is upgraded...
WebDriver is updated on a consistent basis to stay current with the new browser versions that are coming out. Firefox has a very fast release schedule. For your application to support the very latest Firefox version, then you'll have to keep it updated with the latest WebDriver version that supports that version.
My advice is to tell your users which Firefox versions are supported by your application, and then setup a regular release cycle with them, in which you update WebDriver to work with the latest Firefox versions. Then as new Firefox versions are released, you can update your application and send them the newest version.
Chrome is in a similar position, but for WebDriver, the Chromium team maintains the ChromeDriver, which doesn't always need update for each Chrome version.
Internet Explorer has a very slow release cycle, so you won't need to update the WebDriver assemblies as often for IE.
However, staying on the latest WebDriver version does have advantages, regardless of the browsers you need to support in your application, such as the latest bug fixes.
I'm running Firefox 7 in Ubuntu 11.04, and I noticed socket.io was falling back from web sockets to xhr-polling, so I typed WebSocket in Firefox's console, and got
[00:48:21.224] ReferenceError: WebSocket is not defined
On Google Chrome 14 I got
WebSocket
function WebSocket() { [native code] }
According to this, WebSockets is partly supported since firefox 4 and fully supported since firefox 6.
Is it only different in firefox on linux ?
In Firefox 4/5, WebSockets support is present but disabled (activated via about:config). In Firefox 6, Mozilla enabled WebSockets by default but added the "Moz" prefix. Also, note that Firefox 6 uses the newer HyBi protocol and W3C API. Chrome added the HyBi protocol in Chrome 14 although Chrome has never used a prefix.
The protocol is effectively complete and the official first version is expected to be published in about 6 weeks (the wire format has not changed significantly in months). The API has also been quite stable for months and Chrome 14+ and Firefox 6+ basically have the same implementation of the API. For some reason Mozilla has chosen to be even more cautious than normal with WebSockets prefixing. Perhaps it is a reaction to Google not being careful enough about prefixing unstable APIs.
Unless you are interested in binary message support, specific error and close condition handling or sub-protocol selection, then the WebSockets API has been essentially the same since Chrome introduced it a couple of years ago. If you are implementing a WebSockets server then you will need to know about the various versions of the protocol which has seen significant changes in the past 2 years.
Try MozWebSocket instead.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/WebSockets#AutoCompatibilityTable
Firefox 7 supports hybi-10 "straight out of the box." I've been running it against my Firefox 7 supports hybi-10 "straight out of the box." I've been running it against my websocket server. You can try my online demo with Firefox 7 and let me know if you have any problem. I've tested it from Ubuntu 11. I have that set up right now.
How well is -moz-box-shadow supported by Firefox? I thought I heard of it for quite some time but the page
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/css/-moz-box-shadow
says that it is not supported until Firefox 3.5 and Gecko 1.9.1? (with current Firefox 3.6.12 and Gecko 1.9.2) So it is not supported until recently, is that true?
That really depends on your definition of recent. Firefox 3.5 was released on June 30, 2009. It's also the oldest browser supported by Mozilla (has not reached end of life yet, but probably will shortly after Firefox 4 is released).