Turn off IE6/7 support by default for 7.x-5.0-beta1 (and later) [#1524228]

Over in #1181622: Add responsive layouts to Zen I'm working on adding a layout using box-sizing: border-box, which isn't supported by IE7 and earlier.

You can easily add a polyfill forbox-sizing: border-box, but that polyfill is licensed under the LGPL 3, so I can't add it to Zen directly. https://github.com/Schepp/box-sizing-polyfill

So we can do one of the following:

Leave IE6/7 support on, but have the layout fail unless you manually add the polyfill to your sub-theme. :-\
Leave IE6/7 support on, but don't use box-sizing: border-box in the layout. Given that box-sizing: border-box is so awesome, I don't want to go this route.
Talk to the author of https://github.com/Schepp/box-sizing-polyfill and see if we can get this re-licensed to be GPL 2.
Turn of IE6/7 support by default, but make it easy to turn it back on. This is trivial with Sass, since we can (and already do) have the $legacy-support-for-ie6 and $legacy-support-for-ie7 variables to turn on/off CSS.

At Palantir, we mostly do IE8 and later sites, but do occasionally have a client needing IE7. So I vote for #4.

Comment	File	Size	Author
#3	1524228-3-ie7-off.patch	845 bytes	JohnAlbin

Support from Acquia helps fund testing for Drupal Acquia logo

Comments

Comment #1

tim.plunkett

he/him

English

Philadelphia

CreditAttribution: tim.plunkett commented 9 April 2012 at 13:14

#3 and #4 aren't mutually exclusive. #3 would be better for the everyone, and #4 would be best for Zen.

Comment #2

JohnAlbin

he/they/他

English

Taipei, Taiwan

CreditAttribution: JohnAlbin commented 9 April 2012 at 14:57

To further describe #3: Because the polyfill is an IE "behavior", the path to the .htc file is relative to the HTML page and not to the CSS file, .i.e. its easier to use an absolute path to the site root. And since Drupal doesn't have to be in the root of the webserver, we can't know the path to the theme relative to the webserver root and we can't properly configure the polyfill anyway. :-(

So, option #3 is better from Drupal, but is still awkward for theme development since you'd have to dynamically write CSS based on installation path and that dynamic CSS would be separated from the other CSS of the theme, etc, etc.

Its probably just simpler to let the themer manually tweak the path while they are installing the polyfill.