[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Public WebGL] WebGL 0.92



Addendum: I don't think such code is bad because it lets you detect some specific IE revision (you can do that anyway from the UA-string). I think it's bad because it requires a developer to have performed extensive testing on each of those IE revisions to distill the gleamed wisdom of what works and what doesn't into some kind of working code. There's also interesting questions of what'll happen to that version if microsoft crosses the 1.0 border. Will there be a 1.1.0, 1.2.0, 1.3.0 or rather, those could be minor revisions, like 1.0.1 (which exists, but would mean an entirely different thing) and then continue trough 1.0.2, 1.0.2 trough to say 1.0.99 or whatever.


On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 10:03 AM, Dean Jackson <dino@apple.com> wrote:
We also have to be careful that this information doesn't become a UA-like string. i.e used for feature detection. That's why I think it should be specified - so that we all implement it the same way. 

I'm not concerned about feature inference from an opaque string per-se. Unless you can detect the features working and the ones not, then that's the only thing you can do. I'm concerned about two things:

1) This being unspecified, so it's necessarily fuzzy, which is bad for developers. 

2) Code like this:

if(version.indexOf('0.92') != -1) // IE 11 2013-ish
{ ... }
if(version.indexOf('0.93') != -1) // IE 11 2014
{ ... }
if(version.indexOf('0.94') != -1) // IE 11 Service Pack 2
{ ... }
if(version.indexOf('0.94') != -1) // IE 12
{ ... }
if(version.indexOf('0.95') != -1) // IE 12 rev B
{ ... }
else if(version.indexOf('1.0') != -1) // Not IE
{ ... }

and so forth.