What does it mean to be "web-compatible"?

[Adam Ahmed]

I got curious after reading the Array.prototype.contains thread.

I understand it means 'old things on the Web will break', but is there some
cutoff? Based on number sites or number of affected users?

Couldn't find a definition searching esdiscuss.org - apologies if it's been
discussed.

Cheers!
Adam
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20141008/d07bb509/attachment.html>

[Tab Atkins Jr.]

Post by Adam Ahmed
I got curious after reading the Array.prototype.contains thread.
I understand it means 'old things on the Web will break', but is there some
cutoff? Based on number sites or number of affected users?
Couldn't find a definition searching esdiscuss.org - apologies if it's been
discussed.

No official cut-off. The strict definition is "whatever amount of
breakage browsers are willing to tolerate", which varies from
browser-to-browser and somewhat randomly anyway. In Blink, for
example, we tend to be okay with breaking things around a .001%
cutoff.

~TJ

[Adam Ahmed]

Thanks! 0.001% of what?

Post by Tab Atkins Jr.

Post by Adam Ahmed
I got curious after reading the Array.prototype.contains thread.
I understand it means 'old things on the Web will break', but is there

some

Post by Adam Ahmed
cutoff? Based on number sites or number of affected users?
Couldn't find a definition searching esdiscuss.org - apologies if it's

been

Post by Adam Ahmed
discussed.

No official cut-off. The strict definition is "whatever amount of
breakage browsers are willing to tolerate", which varies from
browser-to-browser and somewhat randomly anyway. In Blink, for
example, we tend to be okay with breaking things around a .001%
cutoff.
~TJ

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20141008/26c79913/attachment-0001.html>

[Tab Atkins Jr.]

Post by Adam Ahmed
Thanks! 0.001% of what?

Page views, more or less.

~TJ