Making sure their web apps work properly across browsers is one of the main issues web developers face when developing websites. Although current browser compatibility has improved significantly, there are still certain common cross browser testing issues that might detract from the user experience. Differences in layout, varying interpretations of HTML and CSS standards, and compatibility with modern technology are often linked to these issues.
Table of Contents
Cross-browser testing: what is it?
The process of making sure a website functions properly across a variety of browsers and devices is known as cross-browser testing. Web developers should consider:
- Lots of browsers, some a little out of date and unable to support every new feature that is added to JS/CSS.
- Different devices with varying hardware capabilities, include laptops, tablets, smartphones, smart TVs, and desktops.
- People with impairments, who might only be able to use a keyboard or who depend on assistive technology such as screen readers.
Top Cross Browser Testing Challenges
Insufficient Assistance for Contemporary Features
One of the most common problems with cross-browser compatibility is that contemporary HTML, CSS, and JavaScript capabilities are not always supported. While basic text style, colors, and layout characteristics are supported by most browsers, using more recent features that are limited to specific browser versions might cause issues for developers working with HTML elements and CSS properties.
Vendor-Specific Functions
Another common problem in cross-browser compatibility arises from the use of vendor-specific functions. Different browsers use different prefixes for certain CSS properties and features. This means that a feature designed for one browser may not work in another unless the appropriate prefix is used.
Exploring Browser Assistance
Following the identification of a list of contemporary technologies that are not supported by all browsers, the next stage is to investigate the browsers that support these features and determine methods for offering fallback options. This can entail developing workarounds for browsers that don’t support a certain feature or employing polyfills, which are scripts that mimic the functionality of contemporary features in antiquated browsers.
Developers should generally strive to offer a graceful degradation experience, guaranteeing that their website continues to work even in the event that certain contemporary features become unavailable.
Fallback Behavior for HTML
The processes included in HTML for managing unsupported features can make creating cross-browser compatible webpages easier. An unrecognized HTML element is handled by a browser as an anonymous inline element, much like a tag, and can be styled with CSS by developers in the same way as any other element. This implies that even if the browser does not completely support an element’s functionality, developers can still use current HTML elements and style them with CSS.
Fallback Behavior for CSS
Fallback techniques are built into CSS as well, enabling developers to lessen problems with cross-browser compatibility. When a browser encounters an unrecognized CSS rule or property, it just ignores it without raising an error. This keeps the entire website from breaking, even though it occasionally leads to less than ideal user experiences. It is possible to use this behavior to develop reliable backup plans.
Managing Prefixes in CSS
Vendor prefixes are a common source of cross-browser issues. Browser vendors frequently use prefixes (such -webkit-, -moz-, or -ms-) to signal that a feature is still experimental when they first implement new CSS capabilities. Although this enables developers to test new features, improper usage of the prefixes may result in compatibility issues.
Issues with Responsive Design
While responsive design is an essential part of contemporary web development, cross-browser problems can also arise from it. It is imperative for developers to ensure that their websites function and display correctly on a variety of devices, each having a unique screen size, aspect ratio, and resolution. Media queries are the primary means of handling different screen sizes; yet, issues could arise if a browser is missing key crucial features.
For instance, because they may have slower internet connections and less processing power than desktop computers, mobile devices usually require smaller graphics and lighter information. Depending on the screen size and resolution of the device, developers can load different versions of responsive images by using the element and the srcset attribute. Developers must incorporate fallback options, such as a standard src property that offers a default image for unsupported browsers, because these functionalities are not supported by all browsers.
Missing CSS Resets
Every browser applies its own default styles to HTML elements. This means that if a developer does not explicitly define styles for an element, each browser will display the element differently based on its default styles. This can lead to inconsistencies in layout and design.
Solution:
To solve this, developers should use a CSS reset stylesheet. CSS resets override the browser’s default styles, ensuring that all elements start from the same baseline. Popular reset stylesheets include Eric Meyer’s CSS Reset and Normalize.css. By applying a reset stylesheet, developers can ensure a consistent starting point for their own custom styles.
Outdated Browser Detection
Another common cross-browser issue arises from outdated browser detection mechanisms. As they develop, browsers drop support for outdated features and add new ones. Because of this, a website that was flawless on an outdated browser version might not run correctly on a more recent one, or the other way around.
Outdated JavaScript libraries that attempt to detect specific browsers can fail, leading to improper rendering or functionality. Relying on browser detection, instead of feature detection, can result in issues when browsers update or when new ones are introduced.
Solution:
Rather than detecting specific browsers, developers should focus on feature detection. Tools like Modernizr help by checking which features a browser supports, allowing developers to tailor their code based on capabilities rather than browser type. Modernizr performs tests on the browser’s features and can dynamically load scripts or styles that are needed to ensure compatibility.
Lack of Testing on Real Devices
A major problem with browser compatibility is that websites are not being tested on actual hardware. Even while they are helpful, virtual environments and emulators frequently fall short of accurately simulating the behavior of a real device. Actual people visit websites using a range of operating systems, devices, and browsers, each with its own special features. Testing a website on actual devices that are comparable to the ones end consumers will probably use is the best approach to make sure it functions properly on all platforms.
Testing on actual hardware, however, can be difficult and costly. Maintaining a personal device lab with every possible device and browser combination is not viable for developers. Cloud-based testing platforms like LambdaTest are useful in this situation. LambdaTest is an AI-powered test orchestration and execution platform. It enables users to perform cross-browser testing across 3000 browser versions and operating systems.
Testing on an excessive number of browsers, including outdated ones
The fact that there are far too many browsers and their corresponding versions is one of the most significant obstacles to cross-browser testing. Not every company has the resources to host and manage every browser, version, and device internally. Maintaining your web application’s performance across all of them and staying up to date with them is the bigger challenge.
For instance, your program may have been created with compatibility for the five most popular browsers: Internet Explorer, Chrome, Safari, Firefox, and Opera. Since there are just five of them, it appears to be rather simple and doable. But not every user of your site may be using the most recent version of every browser.
The answer is a comprehensive platform that supports both modern and outdated browsers.
The simplest way to approach this issue is to first determine whether or not you need to test your web application on each of these browsers and versions. The browsers being used and visitor statistics can be simply examined to do this. You can prioritize your test, that is, start with the browsers with the largest user base, based on the results. Assume, however, that consumers of your online application are utilizing every browser and every version of the browser.
Regular updates to browsers
It is the nature of browsers to evolve roughly every six to eight weeks. The bulk of people update with new versions. People who have enabled auto-updates may not even be aware that they are using a new version of their browser in some situations. This forces the testing team to retest in order to make sure that everything functions properly with the most recent iterations of browsers.
Different companies take different approaches. A certain section disregards the updated versions unless a user detects an issue. Although it seems practical, occasionally the damage can frighten off a lot of clients until it is fixed. However, if damage control is put off, a company risks losing important customers, and the return on investment may take a while.
The preventative strategy is used in the opposite part. They don’t provide customers an opportunity to protest and maintain their websites up to date with the newest browser versions.
Solution: Use automated testing to stay current with new browser versions.
As was previously mentioned, testing browsers automatically is a difficult task. However, the work is ultimately worthwhile. You still have two options for handling it: use a third-party cross-browser testing solution to stay up to speed with the most recent browser upgrades, or ignore your web application testing on the new browser until the customer reports any bugs.
Looking for visual issues across all screen sizes
It can take a long time to manually check your website for visual issues. It is noteworthy, however, that identifying malfunctioning design in websites and web applications through test automation can be quite challenging. There is a lot to handle in this situation, particularly when we start to account for the various test settings.
Adding screen resolution will now increase complexity, particularly when using the manual method. The list would never end if we were to include mobile devices, each with its own unique set of browsers.
A Selenium-based solution that can enable seamless automation of UI testing is necessary in such a scenario. For example, your tests should be taking screenshots while executing multiple commands. By looking through the screenshots that were taken, this aids in assessing how consistent the user interface is. Additionally, you may use the LambdaTest LT Browser function, which will assist you in testing and debugging mobile websites on different viewports, if you wish to test numerous screen resolutions simultaneously.
Conclusion
Web developers still have difficulties when it comes to cross-browser compatibility, but with the correct techniques, it is feasible to create websites that work effectively across a variety of browsers. Through the utilization of fallback strategies, graceful degradation, and research on browser support for contemporary technologies, developers may reduce compatibility problems and offer a consistent user experience.
