Firefox supports supports, gets my support

http://www.broken-links.com/2012/08/06/firefox-supports-supports-gets-my-support/

by cleverjake • 14 years ago

64 28 14 years ago

I rather see this:

    @supports (vendor-prefix)

then apply vendor prefixes to all css rules not understood by the browser.

End of nightmare.

nathan_long• 14 years ago

>> to all css rules not understood by the browser

I don't get it. It seems like you're saying, "if it supports the -moz prefix, it's FireFox, therefore I know that it doesn't support X and needs -mox-X."

But that requires you to separately know that the browser doesn't support X - the very thing this is trying to solve.

It's much simpler to say "if it supports X, use it." If the browser releases a new version that supports X, you don't have to do anything for those users to get the benefit.

Did I misunderstand you?

harlanlewis3• 14 years ago

The progressive enhancement approach you describe does not address cases where an alternative should be provided for less capable browsers.

The closest analog in existing tools might be YepNope - "a conditional loader for your polyfills." http://yepnopejs.com/

There's an argument to be made that this is unnecessarily reducing maintainability and increasing development complexity by building redundant functionality to account for edge cases, but there are scenarios where it's appropriate. Building modern web apps with a support gradient more inclusive than latest Webkit/Gecko will appreciate the tools.

FlukeATX2• 14 years ago

Just me, or an issue with the styling?

http://i.imgur.com/pEzve.png

stopsatgreen3• 14 years ago

I'm the site owner; never seen that before. Which browser/OS are you on?

TazeTSchnitzel2• 14 years ago

I'm not him/her, but I've experienced this on Linux sometimes. It's not something you can fix as the site owner, I think.

staticshock• 14 years ago

I'm seeing the same thing, running chromium 18 on ubuntu.

FlukeATX2• 14 years ago

Linux Mint 11 with Chrome 18.0.1025.162.

MatthewPhillips3• 14 years ago

Good step in the right direction. Now we need the same thing for JavaScript.

notatoad• 14 years ago

JavaScript already has this, no? Just check to see if a function is typeof undefined.

MatthewPhillips3• 14 years ago

I meant to test of HTML5/CSS features are supported through JavaScript. For example, if I want to know if the browser supports <input type="number" /> it's not as easy as it should be.

squarecat• 14 years ago

Is there a discussion somewhere that clearly articulates the merits of the increasing complexity of CSS? I realize there's some maturation taking place, but there seems to be a giddy, almost drunken, exuberance for expanding a language beyond logical context. (e.g., Frodo carrying a BFG?) At what point does a new container become reasonable? Something such as "SOS" (Style Objects Sheet)?

I'm not confident if that made sense, but basically I'm concerned that we're (re)creating a personally oft-encountered tension where the individuals that best understand a complex syntax are the least able to create anything aesthetically-pleasing, let alone usable, from it...

MatthewPhillips3• 14 years ago

Many people have that concern. What we don't want is to take away CSS maintenance from non-developer designers.

harlanlewis3• 14 years ago

I'm concerned about what level feature detections occurs.

For example, it makes sense to have a native @support CSS rule checking for things like border-box support.

But what about detecting features that are separate from rendering? Should @support check for geolocation?

If not, where does that test live - javascript (modernizr, yepnope)? Is separating tests based on type of feature a good thing? If so, how should the interactions between display and feature be intelligently managed? If not, is CSS, Javascript, or some other layer the appropriate place to consolidate tests?

Testing for non-rendering concerns in CSS doesn't make any sense to me, and I'm afraid our future will be HTML markup full of classes namespaced by concern, managed by javascript & feature detection. It's an evolution, but hardly elegant. (class="js-toggle function-geolocation structure-list typography-chrome")

cleverjake• 14 years ago

>>But what about detecting features that are separate from rendering? Should @support check for geolocation?

>>The ‘@supports’ rule is a conditional group rule whose condition tests whether the user agent supports CSS property:value pairs.

Source - http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-conditional/#at-supports

So, no. @supports will check for css rules, and nothing else.

That would just be silly.

zacharyvoase• 14 years ago

Is it not ironic, though, that we’re at a point that any browser which supports @supports would also support any property you’d test for support for?

rmc• 14 years ago

Now yes. But what about in 5 years time? You'll be able to use @supports to find out what a browser supports

TazeTSchnitzel2• 14 years ago

It's so simple and elegant I'm surprised we haven't added it before. Oh well.

Firefox supports supports, gets my support

Related Stories