Closed arthurevans closed 6 years ago
i like the idea of a table showing exactly what polyfills & build transforms each browser requires, provided it wouldn't require too much maintenance for it to stay accurate.
@katejeffreys if it works for you, I was thinking of doing something like that:
Right now it's not very nice haha
BTW, tomorrow Mozilla release Firefox 60 with ES Modules, so... One more green box! :)
BTW the relevant quote from Polymer/tools#191
Modules support now requires dynamic import and import.meta. Specifically, this means: Safari modules support is now from 11.1 instead of 10.1/10.3 Chrome modules support is now from 64 instead of 61. Vivaldi supports modules (tested).
Take 1, updating all this stuff.
Staged here: https://3-0-polyfills-dot-polymer-project.appspot.com/3.0/docs/browsers
Most of the volume here is in my stab at adding info on modules.
Already really good stuff in Dan's README for the polyfills, unsure of whether to pull some of that in here, or to just point to it.
Also, it's still really hard to tell what browser needs what. I wonder if it'd be better to just have a table like:
Browser & version range | ES6/ES5 | ES Modules/AMD | Polyfills Req'd | Module name transform
Where we'd have multiple lines for a browser if the values were different.
(And yes, all browsers (currently) require the name=>path transform, but at least it makes it clear that some transform is always required.)
LMK what you think.