| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Internet Explorer 8 and Acid2: A Milestone | |
|
||
| Time: 14:19 EST/19:19 GMT | News Source: Microsoft | Posted By: Jonathan Tigner | ||
|
As a team, we’ve spent the last year heads down working hard on IE8. Last week, we achieved an important milestone that should interest web developers. IE8 now renders the “Acid2 Face” correctly in IE8 standards mode. If you’re not a web developer, the details of this blog post probably aren’t all that interesting for you. I’d like you to know that we’re building IE8 for many different customers (consumers, web service providers, independent software vendors, enterprises, web developers, and others), and we’ll cover more details of the non-developer oriented work (e.g. user experience, reliability, security, etc.) in other posts in the future, after MIX. While web developers will immediately recognize what Acid2 means, I want to step back and offer some context for other readers of this blog who may not be familiar with web standards. Briefly: Acid2 is one test of how modern browsers work with some specific features across several different web standards. At first glance, this test seems simple. I think it actually offers a view into the subtle and complex world of web standards in a number of ways. Showing the Acid2 page correctly is a good indication of being standards compliant, but Acid2 itself isn’t a web standard or a web standards compliance test. The publisher of the test, the Web Standards Project, is an advocacy group, not a web standards defining body. Related: | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 402 Last | Next |
The time now is
8:21:26 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 12/19/2007 2:53:01 PM |
| Finally. Good to see MS adopting web standards. What I'd like to see next is a flip of the modes; make the default mode 'standards' mode, and the 'legacy IE crap' mode as the optional mode. |
| #2 By 92283 (142.32.208.232) at 12/19/2007 3:12:38 PM |
|
"Acid2 itself isn’t a web standard or a web standards compliance test. The publisher of the test, the Web Standards Project, is an advocacy group, not a web standards defining body."
Asshats have trouble reading. |
| #3 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 12/19/2007 3:43:20 PM |
|
#2: From the summary above:
"Showing the Acid2 page correctly is a good indication of being standards compliant" From wiki: "Acid2 employs certain features of HTML and, more prominently, CSS. The purpose of employing such features is to highlight the problems with browsers that do not display it correctly. The Acid2 test should render correctly on any browser that follows the W3C HTML and CSS 2.0 specifications. Any browser which does not correctly and completely support all of the features which Acid2 uses will not render the page correctly. Because Acid2 tests how web browsers deal with faulty code, the test is intentionally not written to W3C CSS standard specifications. Thus it will fail W3C CSS validation. This is expected and was the intention of its designers." Asshats can read, but have trouble comprehending. |
| #4 By 53078 (72.252.9.36) at 12/19/2007 4:51:10 PM |
|
ok why are we bashing microsoft for finally doing a browser that will have full up to date standards ... when safari was announced to render acid page correctly their mise as well have been parades and parties worldwide, or thats how it seemed by the tech websites.
microosfts releaseing a browser that can render standards properly as well as compatability with IE designed sites from previous years. give the damn company props when it does something good for gods sake |
| #5 By 2459 (69.22.120.94) at 12/19/2007 5:23:14 PM |
| #1, there is no default mode. The web developer controls what mode is used by following the standards or not. Pass IE the correct doctype for whatever standard you're using and IE will render in standards mode. |
| #6 By 53078 (72.252.9.36) at 12/19/2007 6:03:54 PM |
|
#5: i think what #1 doesn't understand is microsoft isnce IE5 has had a "standards" and "qwirks" mode.... just like other browsers....
If a site has the proper docttype it registers in standards mode to utilize the proper css strict types etc... this is what IE didn't fully comply with... well... IE7 went very far and was quite good compared to previous versions... Qwirks mode is the mode in which IE and other browsers dont recognise the doctype and attempt to "fix" stupid html errors and display it to the best of their ability. The fact that the microsoft standards mode has rendered acid properly is wicked, considering the latest firefox i've usedfrom 3.0 branch doesnt render it properly yet. |
| #7 By 53078 (72.252.9.36) at 12/19/2007 6:04:59 PM |
|
BTW latest firefox in macosx (not 3.0) does not render acid properly at all , oddly enough the 10.5 osx safari doesnt render it exactly either, but better than firefox osx does This post was edited by cchance on Wednesday, December 19, 2007 at 18:07. |
| #8 By 15406 (99.224.112.94) at 12/19/2007 7:47:32 PM |
|
#4: Nobody's bashing MS here that I can see. I was sincere with my approval, but I misunderstood the way it was handled (as later clarified by n4cer.)
#5: Thanks, I didn't know that. I thought it was a user setting. Or is it both? #6: I understood that IE supported two modes, and was under the impression that it was something they just introduced in IE7. IE6 was just quirks mode, essentially. #7: FF2 doesn't pass Acid2 either so it's not surprising it doesn't work on OSX, but the FF3 b2 does. Good to see both IE and FF catch up with other browsers. |
| #9 By 16797 (65.93.213.131) at 12/19/2007 8:14:45 PM |
|
#8: It is under developer's control.
Simply, if you put proper DOCTYPE tag in your page, it will set IE to render page in "standard" mode. If you don't have it (or, I believe, you can use slightly different DOCTYPE), it will use quirks mode ( so that "old" pages are still rendered properly). Other browsers also work that way (at least Firefox does). IE6 was not just quirks mode. It also supported "standard" mode, though implementation was lacking. |
| #10 By 53078 (72.252.10.248) at 12/19/2007 9:38:08 PM |
| LOL i guess you could kind of say, that IE6's standard mode had it's own little qwirks ... lol |
| #11 By 2960 (72.196.195.185) at 12/20/2007 7:43:14 AM |
|
#4,
Latch actually gave MS a rare compliment. Of course, Parker, or whatever the hell his name is this week, had to come in and piss all over that as well. With parkker, it's not the reality, it's the argument it seems. TL |
| #12 By 37047 (216.191.227.68) at 12/20/2007 8:12:24 AM |
|
#11: Parkkker just likes to insult people. He contributes nothing else to any conversation. In fact, I generally consider him a conversational shark. By that, I mean that whenever he comes into a conversation thread, the thread immediately declines, so it can be said that whenever he appears, the thread jumps the shark, with him as said shark. This is a rare thread where conversation managed to continue intelligently despite his appearance.
#1: I agree. Nice to see IE and Firefox will both be conforming to ACID2 in their respective next releases, finally. Now we just have to get web site designers to start conforming to proper web standards, declaring proper DOCTYPEs, ensuring valid markup, etc. I believe that one of the worst things that Microsoft and others did was figuring out and properly rendering bad HTML code. This has lead many a HTML coder to be lazy and not ensure that the markup is valid. Failing to load poorly formatted pages would have led to a much more standards compliant web environment long ago. Now, I await an ad hominem attack from Parkkker. |
| #13 By 16797 (65.93.213.131) at 12/20/2007 12:32:33 PM |
|
#10 Well.. is that any different than, for example, Firefox 1/1.5/2 or IE7? Those do not pass Acid2, not even today. They (all) still have work to do. This post was edited by gonzo on Thursday, December 20, 2007 at 12:34. |
| #14 By 92283 (64.180.196.143) at 12/20/2007 3:34:29 PM |
|
#12 I only like to insult Asshats who like to lie about using Vista. I don't hang out on Slashdot insulting open source.
The fact that you can't stand it when I point out Firefox and Apples flaws makes you a hypocritical Asshat. |
| #15 By 12071 (203.185.215.144) at 12/20/2007 5:43:33 PM |
|
#13 "Firefox 1/1.5/2 or IE7? Those do not pass Acid2, not even today. They (all) still have work to do."
You're absolutely right, they all have work to do - the difference however is in how much work they really have outstanding. Just because they don't pass Acid2, some come a LOT closer than others, i.e. http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/acid/ Congrats to Opera for not only getting their browser, but also their mobile browser to pass Acid2! That's who the other browsers should be competing against. |
| #16 By 16797 (65.93.213.131) at 12/21/2007 7:33:57 AM |
|
#15 So?
I'm dealing with different browsers on a daily basis and I just don't see the big problem here. Problems are well known, workarounds are well documented.. that is what really matters. Yeah, I agree, it is better that they all pass Acid2, but I don't think it is THAT important. |
| #17 By 37047 (216.191.227.68) at 12/21/2007 7:43:25 AM |
|
#11: With parkker, it's not the reality, it's the argument it seems.
As you can see, you have been proven right once again. #14: I only like to insult Asshats who like to lie about using Vista. Since I have never claimed to use Vista, and you insult me constantly, that makes you a liar. The fact that you can't stand it when I point out Firefox and Apples flaws makes you a hypocritical Asshat. I have no problems with you pointing out FF and Apple flaws. I agree that both products have them. I only have an issue with your constant need to link to unrelated Firefox or Quicktime flaws whenever a flaw is discovered and discussed in a Microsoft product. That makes you a hypocrite and a shill. Therefore, you are a liar AND a hypocrite AND a drone-like shill. A lying hypocritical mindless shill with delusions of self worth. Grow up and get over yourself, and try something novel, like actually contributing something useful to a conversation. If you need help, ask one of your teachers or your parents for help. |
| #18 By 37047 (216.191.227.68) at 12/21/2007 7:53:40 AM |
| #16: The reason for tests like ACID2 is that if all browsers can render them correctly, and all browsers do their best effort to support web standards, then web site designers can code to the standard, confident that people can see what they created, regardless of their browser of choice. Having to code to the lowest common denominator, or make different versions for different browsers, makes the process harder and take longer, thereby diminishing the web experience for all of us. A rich web site that just works, regardless of the browser being used to view it, is a good thing. Then, companies like Microsoft, Mozilla, Opera, etc., could compete on features, and not simply try to gain a choke hold on the browser market by using proprietary markup tags, as was done in the Netscape days. This worked out badly for Netscape, but Microsoft took it to a new level, and destroyed the competitive browser market for years. It took Mozilla's major redesign of the Netscape code base, changing it into Firefox, to reinvigorate the browser market again. FF 2 (and soon 3) and IE 7 (and soon 8) are the benefits of that. I firmly believe that without Firefox, there would never have been an IE 7 or IE 8. Microsoft stopped caring about the browser until Firefox came along and started to chip away at its market share in a significant enough way to make them take notice. Opera is a good browser, and more standards compliant than both FF and IE, but it failed to gain enough market share to garner any notice from Microsoft. |
| #19 By 16797 (65.93.213.131) at 12/21/2007 5:51:20 PM |
|
#18 I am fully aware of that, all I am saying is that it, for me, is not end of the world if all browsers are not passing Acid2, given that workarounds for problems are well known. I mean, is it not currently like that now?
Look, there is also standard SQL. Do major RDBMS support it? No, everyone has their own SQL dialect. So, yes, it is harder for us developers because of that, but I don't see that many people complaining about it. Do you? This post was edited by gonzo on Friday, December 21, 2007 at 17:52. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 402 Last | Next |
The time now is
8:21:26 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
