9 ms·
Status IE – IE's feature status and plans
- AdamTReineke 13y agoChrome's dashboard: http://www.chromestatus.com http://www.chromestatus.com
- devnetfx 13y agoThanks for the link. I always found it hard to know what is happening in new versions of chrome and which feature became available when. This is exactly what I needed - Thanks! Also found chrome dashboard easier to use than IE dashboard but that's understandable as this is new effort. And, if anyone from IE team is here, how about some consistency with developer tools with other browsers as well. The web developer UI in IE 11 is so different that I struggle to found simple things - maybe I am not good in recognizing new icons :)
- AdamTReineke 13y agoI'm actually on the dev tools team. I'll pass along the feedback to the PMs.
- jakub_g 13y agoDoes someone know if there's there something similar for Firefox available / planned? The best I can think of is googling for release notes for current beta/aurora [1][2] for "coming soon" but it lacks long term things. [1] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/29.0beta/releasenotes/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/29.0beta/releasenotes/ [2] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/30.0a2/auroranotes/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/30.0a2/auroranotes/
- agapos 13y agoMaybe these: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Platform/2014-Q1-Goals https://wiki.mozilla.org/Platform/2014-Q1-Goals https://wiki.mozilla.org/Platform/2014-Q2-Goals https://wiki.mozilla.org/Platform/2014-Q2-Goals https://wiki.mozilla.org/2014 https://wiki.mozilla.org/2014 Edit: forgot this one: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Firefox/Releases https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Firefox/Releases
- barista 13y agoThis is very helpful. Now all we need is autoupdate so that as a developer I can confidently depend on those new features in the dashboard to be actually deployed on client machines.
- McGlockenshire 13y agoNone of the things listed as "not currently planned" are big surprises, though seeing WebRTC there is very disappointing. I've never seen "Object RTC" before, is it a competing effort, or a restandardization effort?
- dstorey 13y agoObject RTC is developed by a community group at the W3C. It includes people from Google, Microsoft and a number of telecom companies, amongst others http://www.w3.org/community/ortc/ http://www.w3.org/community/ortc/
- alfet 13y agoso whats the difference between the two? its the first time i hear about object RTC.
- elisee 13y agoMicrosoft had a competing proposal to WebRTC called CU-RTC-Web which, as far as I understand it, proposed to get rid of the Session Description Protocol (which is text-based and thus difficult to parse/edit) and provide lower-level APIs instead (details here: http://www.tokbox.com/blog/what-the-cu-rtc-web-vs-webrtc-debate-means-for-developers/ http://www.tokbox.com/blog/what-the-cu-rtc-web-vs-webrtc-deb...). I've just started reading up on ObjectRTC but I believe it plans to offer an API to replace SDP too and Microsoft has moved to it since it's similar to their CU-RTC-Web proposal. All in all, it looks like this will delay the adoption of WebRTC everywhere but will be for the best in terms of API and developer experience in the end.
- amaks 13y ago"Lowe level API instead" suspiciously sounds like a lock in tactic for a platform specific stuff (read Windows).
- 13y ago
- TheCoreh 13y agoWould be nice to know if they plan on implementing special handling for asm.js. This info is nowhere on this chart.
- JacobRossi 13y agoAh,yes, good suggestion to add to our list on the site. Look for an update soon from our JS engine (Chakra) team's plan.
- TheCoreh 13y agoThanks for such a fast reply! :) I'm quite happy with Microsoft's recent push towards openness. One additional suggestion: Perhaps you could also include a rationale on why a specific feature is not planned to be implemented: e.g. WebRTC. (Though I can anticipate this might not be feasible to do for strategic / management reasons.)
- higherpurpose 13y agoWebRTC is not even in their plan yet. Sigh.
- snird 13y agoThey are comparing IE to other real modern browsers - it's rather surprising to see. Like saying "The competitors are far ahead, here what they already do and we don't and out of that what we plan to do next and what not.".
- dstorey 13y agoThere are only 13 features listed there not currently supported in IE and supported by Chrome, Safari, and Firefox. Of those, 4 are currently in development.
- geetee 13y agoI'm bewildered by the many "under consideration" entries. When all the other major players support something, and you want to be taken seriously, why aren't you throwing more engineers at the problem?
- JacobRossi 13y agoIf feature status were a Facebook relationship status, many might say "it's complicated." ;-) Most of the time, it's not actually a question of engineering resources. Stay tuned as we update more and more stuff to "In Development". (I work for IE)
- geetee 13y agoFor what it's worth, it does look like things are moving in the right direction, so I hope the trend continues!
- derefr 13y agoI'm curious--does this imply internal-politics problems (e.g. getting other departments to expose, and possibly backport, APIs that Chakra needs to consume to do the features), or just weird engineering challenges specific to the Chakra codebase?
- TheCoreh 13y agoI could see some conflicts of interest issues too. (e.g. implementing WebRTC could be against their interests - since Microsoft owns Skype, they might not want to lower the barrier of entry to a competitor.)
- dstorey 13y agoMicrosoft are contributing to Object RTC, so I see this as unlikely.
- Joeri 13y agoIn the past when they've spoken about why they delayed implementation it was often due to security issues (e.g. Webgl) or due to the standards proposal not being mature enough and them being worried that supporting it would lock in a bad version of the spec because people would build code on top.
- pepelepoo 13y agoheheh. This website has a hard dependency on chromestatus.com.
- JacobRossi 13y agoYep, and we're already chatting with the Chrome team on how browsers can collaborate on this type of data. We encourage people to use our data too. It's openly licensed.
- paul7986 13y agoNo web audio API? Are they building in an alternative? All other browsers support web audio. Why isn't MS following along?
- dstorey 13y agoIt’s under consideration.
- wyuenho 13y agoDoes that mean we won't be able to see ES6 modules coming to IE anytime soon?
- dstorey 13y agoI believe the data from the Chakra (IE’s JS engine) team hasn’t been updated yet.
- grumblestumble 13y agoThis is great. I realize that there are probably political hurdles to doing so, but it would be awesome if these linked to MDN in addition to MSDN / W3C / WebPlatform.
- yeukhon 13y agoI still don't understand why IE still mark Content Security Policy (CSP) under consideration given all other major browsers (Firefox, Chrome, Safari and Opera) have at least some version of CSP implemented. I am actually very surprised they don't yet have HSTS implemented. IE is so much behind these security standard IMO. I don't know why they would push Web Crypto into 11+ when they don't even have CSP or HSTS implemented yet. Given the standard, they should have HSTS, then CSP, then Web Crypto and then subresource integrity (which will probably take another year or two to stabilize a final draft for v1). Is this list even up-to-date?
- grumblestumble 13y agoThis is somewhat misleading WRT to Flexbox. IE10 "supports" the abandoned syntax, which is incompatible with the new proposal. It would be very useful if this was explicitly mentioned in cases where the API for these things is in flux.
- pyalot2 13y agoNote that this site lists WebGL as "IE11+". That's false. IE11 has a flavor of webgl that's experimental (prefixed or not) that's reported as version WebGL 0.92 (this is basically an invalid specification conformant string, it's either 1.0 or something not done). Huge gaps and bugs remain in Microsofts WebGL implementation which make it nearly impossible to use except for specific select usecases that Microsoft optimized for. It took google and mozilla about 4 years to get a good WebGL implementation (and they're still not done). It'll take Microsoft years to come to bring their implementation on par with the rest of the WebGL world.
- adrianba 13y agoWe shipped an update to the IE11 WebGL implementation to developers today as part of Windows 8.1 Update. We will roll this out to all IE11 users through Windows Update starting next week. There will be further updates to our WebGL implementation in the summer. If there are specific use cases that you're interested in support for, please let us know what they are so that we can prioritise the order of our implementation.
- pyalot2 13y agoThe most important thing is to run the webgl conformance test (online https://www.khronos.org/registry/webgl/sdk/tests/webgl-conformance-tests.html https://www.khronos.org/registry/webgl/sdk/tests/webgl-confo... github https://github.com/KhronosGroup/WebGL https://github.com/KhronosGroup/WebGL) every day on a variety of machines with different configurations (I assume you have an automated test farm). Another measure that's also very useful is to run the webgl performance regression test suite every day to see if performance got worse or better with the changes. Unfortunately there isn't a comprehensive GLSL syntax test suite, but GLSL has been much of a sore point in IE where some syntax that's valid GLSL would work except in IE (such as uniforms separated by a comma). I've submitted some tickets to IE (and added more conformance tests to cover them) for some of the gaps (gl.SAMPLES, gl.STENCIL_BITS, gl.SUBPIXEL_BITS). A thing that's also a sore point is IEs lack of support for very common extensions such as OES_texture_float_linear, WEBGL_compressed_texture_s3tc, WEBGL_depth_texture, OES_standard_derivatives, OES_vertex_array_object, ANGLE_instanced_arrays, OES_element_index_uint, WEBGL_lose_context. You can get an overview of the state of support on http://webglstats.com/ http://webglstats.com/ A note on floating point texture extensions. If you implement one extension (for instance OES_texture_float) you should really implement the companion extensions as well for texture_float_linear and color_buffer_float. Only the triplet of extensions provides comprehensive overview of support. Personally I'd like to see these run in IE of course: http://codeflow.org/entries/2013/feb/15/soft-shadow-mapping/ http://codeflow.org/entries/2013/feb/15/soft-shadow-mapping/ http://codeflow.org/entries/2013/feb/04/high-performance-js-heatmaps/ http://codeflow.org/entries/2013/feb/04/high-performance-js-... http://codeflow.org/webgl/deferred-irradiance-volumes/www/ http://codeflow.org/webgl/deferred-irradiance-volumes/www/ http://codeflow.org/webgl/trails/www/ http://codeflow.org/webgl/trails/www/ http://codeflow.org/webgl/barycentric-wireframe/www/ http://codeflow.org/webgl/barycentric-wireframe/www/ http://codeflow.org/webgl/ssao/ http://codeflow.org/webgl/ssao/ I think the demos above are fairly good usecases for gaps that you might have, because they exercise a lot of functionality, they're not bound to some specific framework (like three.js) but they are WebGL conformant.
- shmerl 13y ago> WebRTC - Not currently planned Fail.
- jgaylord 13y agoBut Object RTC is under consideration. I believe (but don't quote me) that most of the efforts at the W3C are focused on this over WebRTC. Also, you'll notice that the IE team is taking a slightly more conservative approach to the new features. Since many features are still in draft mode and can significantly change, they're implementing features as they mature.
- shmerl 13y agoMS tried to sabotage mandating free codecs for standard real time communications, but W3C managed to put Opus in WebRTC. Not sure what's going on in parallel efforts in this regard but it's a pretty important issue and MS is on the wrong side in this one.
- gk1 13y agoI wonder if a re-branding is in order. I suspect I'm not the only one who feels an inner discomfort with IE. I even associate the logo and name with thoughts like "outdated," "broken," "difficult," and "cumbersome." I realize they've come a long way, but it's tough to shake off 10+ years of negative experiences and associations.
- dave1010uk 13y agoI see WebP but no mention of WebM video at the moment. Any reason it's not there?
- ZeroGravitas 13y agoIf they do add that, they should specify VP8 and/or VP9 and/or Vorbis and/or Opus rather than just WebM. The Opus audio codec, which was co-developed by Microsoft subsidiary Skype, would be useful both for WebRTC, and the alternative Microsoft favours, ObjectRTC. VP8 and Opus both get mentioned in passing in the ObjectRTC spec that I found, but I don't know if they have the same status as in WebRTC (mandatory for Opus, optional for VP8)
- grn 13y agoYou can also download Virtual Box VMs with different versions of IE http://modern.ie/en-us/virtualization-tools#downloads http://modern.ie/en-us/virtualization-tools#downloads. Indispensable when developing on Linux!
- jakub_g 13y agoSemi-related for cross-browser ES6 compat: http://kangax.github.io/es5-compat-table/es6/ http://kangax.github.io/es5-compat-table/es6/ Shows future versions of Firefox and Chrome but not yet IE.
- agapos 13y agoFuture versions of Fx and Chr are available constantly (on multiple channels at different stages), what is not the case with IE.
- giovannibajo1 13y agoI would like to know from the IE team if there's a specific plan to fix the browser update issue, that is the fact that IE is by far the slower browser when it comes to user upgrades. It's exciting to see features in IE1x+, but we all know that those will be a tiny fraction of users for a long time. I think that gaining consensus in developers' mindset goes through forcing updates like Chrome and Firefox do; don't care if it's monthly, quarterly or yearly, but users shouldn't even realize that an update was pushed to their machine. This model has shown that it works for browsers, and not only that, it has also proven to be the best model. Is there any actual actionable plan on this? Adding new features in IE15 is fine and good, but won't buy a dime in developer consensus, when we still waste time supporting 5-years-old IE browsers at any given time.
- anton_gogolev 13y agoI'd argue that IE is primarily used in corporate settings, when silently upgrading software is a big no-no. Everything has to be tested by the IT/IS department and rolled out in a controlled fashion.
- wil421 13y ago>I'd argue that IE is primarily used in corporate settings I wouldnt make that distinction. While its probably true that some corporate users are still stuck on XP. Most non techy people I know (which is almost everyone) just buy a new laptop open it up and start using IE. They will probably never upgrade unless the computer tells them or does it automatically.
- giovannibajo1 13y agoLast time I managed to find a study showing daily browser market share, I noticed that the drop for old IE versions during the weekend was significant but below 50%. So over half of those users are not corporate users. I don't like citing numbers without a source, but I couldn't find one in 5 minutes Googling. If somebody has a link that shows fairly recent daily IE usage share, we can double check my recall. I would also like to add that one technical solution for the "IE in enterprise" problem would be allowing parallel IE version installations. IE already allows to go into old version emulation mode, but it's not 100% faithful (I don't know the details). If it was 100% faithful, sysadmin could simply update IE to the latest version for normal browsing (or even let it auto-update, since I'm sure no sysadmin believe that he/she can QA IE better than MS for general Internet usage), and forcing compatibility (through GPO) for Intranet sites that are broken in newer version. But since it's not 100% faithful, the technical solution would be allowing to install an auto-updating IE in parallel to IE8, and then configure a policy to automatically switch to IE8 for Intranet sites (Chrome Enterprise does a similar thing; you can configure a GPO so that the user is automatically brought to IE when he/she browses to specific websites, e.g.: Intranet).
- sjf 13y agoHas the Irish domain registry lifted its rules on .ie domains? It used to be that you only register them for Irish businesses, even getting yourname.ie was not straight forward. It's a little disturbing to see this domain.
- haydenchambers 13y agoAnyone that has used postMessage will know that IE support is a joke - only between parent and iframe, not windows, and couldn't post objects up to IE10
- Flenser 13y agotry view-source, it's build using angular, bower and bootstrap.
- jrd79 13y agoCan somebody on the IE team comment on when specific SVG features will be added? I am interested in using a <use> tag with a xlink:href to an element in a different SVG file. This is part of the SVG spec and works in the latest versions of Chrome and FireFox, but does not work in IE 11. Any plans to fix this? My Stack Overflow question on the topic is at: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/22516712/svg-use-tag-with-external-reference-in-ie-11 http://stackoverflow.com/questions/22516712/svg-use-tag-with...
- scotty79 13y agoI'm not really interested in IE news unless it's "IE will use webkit rendering engine from now on."
- throwaway41597 13y agoThanks. Please add a change log so we can quickly know when features get added/rejected/shipped/... Also I found that sorting by status was broken (a block of IE10+ features in the middle of IE11+ ones).