Browser Expectations
Front-end features are unique in that they are subject to the capabilities of a browser. As browsers constantly evolve and standards shift over time, it is helpful to clearly communicate what can be expected of a front-end deliverable.
Standards and Edge Cases
As a general rule, our front-end development team strives to implement front-end features exactly as they were designed using code that complies with modern web standards. In some cases, one or more browsers may present our team with edge cases that to some degree break expectations, meaning that additional work may be required to make a feature meet user expectations in those browsers. In these cases, our team can consult with designers and product owners to deliver graceful solutions that deliver the necessary functionality as closely as possible to the original intent.
Despite our best efforts, however, some browsers simply do not comply with modern web standards, be it by choice or because they are outdated.
Chromatic’s Browser Support Policy
Due to the nature of browsers and the wide spectrum of standards compliance, we’ve split our support list into two sets of browsers: the Standard Browsers and the Extended Browsers. Chromatic supports browsers in our Standard list by default, while support for browsers in our Extended list may be provided at an additional cost. This practice allows Chromatic’s front-end team to build better products faster, making better use of your budget.
Given the dynamic nature of web technologies and browser usage trends, these lists are likely to evolve over time.
Standard Browsers
By default, all front-end deliverables are built to support the latest two versions of the following browsers:
- Chrome
- Chrome for Android
- Safari
- iOS Safari
- Firefox
- Firefox for Android
- Edge
- Samsung Internet
- Android Browser
Extended Browsers
Extended Browsers incur additional effort to ensure front-end deliverables are built in a way that supports them. These browsers meet at least two of the following criteria:
- Low or non-existent support from the maintainers.
- Very poor support or non-compliance of contemporary web technology standards.
- They are used by a small enough subset of web users that explicitly supporting them is not cost effective as a general rule.
Browsers that meet this criteria include, but are not limited to, the following:
- The latest two versions of the following:
- Opera
- Opera Mini
- Opera Mobile
- UC Browser for Android
- QQ Browser
- Baidu Browser
- KaiOS Browser
End-of-Life Browsers
End-of-Life (EOL) browsers have had their product and security support discontinued. Supporting these browsers is particularly discouraged and requires an extremely high level of effort to make any project compatible with modern coding standards. These browsers meet the following criteria:
- No longer receiving any support from the maintainers.
- Very poor support or non-compliance with contemporary web technology standards.
Do I need Extended or End of Life Browser support?
If you have any concerns or are unsure what browser support you require, we will be more than happy to examine your audience’s needs and help you determine what level of support your project requires. Most of the time, this means diving into your project’s existing analytics data, but if that is not available (such as in the case of an entirely new project), market research and educated guesses may be in order.
What is the cost of Extended or End-of-Life Browser support?
Each extended browser added to a project’s browser support stack will impact the level of effort needed to produce front-end deliverables. For example, if a project explicitly requires Internet Explorer 11, Opera, and Opera Mobile support, the level of effort estimated to implement a given front-end deliverable may be increased for each one of those browsers. The amount by which each browser may increase the level of effort depends on the nature of the feature being implemented. This impact is determined on a case by case basis.
How are Extended or End-of-Life Browsers supported?
In some cases, additional work may yield a fully-implemented feature, while in other cases the feature may not be feasible to implement as designed. When a feature cannot be implemented as designed, Chromatic will propose alternatives that serve a reasonable fallback for these browsers. Sometimes that fallback may be a reduction or simplification of the features as originally designed, and other times it will completely replace the feature.