Slashdot Mirror
Details On IE7 CSS Changes
writes "IE development team has released a list of CSS changes for IE7. Some of the notable new features are enabling :hover for all elements, and implementing position:fixed, and PNG transparency support. In addition, there is a long list of fixed bugs that plagued previous IE browsers for years. These changes (except for PNG transparency) only work under the <!DOCTYPE> switch to preserve compatibility with previous versions of IE."
that IE blog post is from August.
Old News.
.. which is certain websites requiring IE to work.
What's changed in CSS specs for IE7 since August?
Has this been previously reported on slashdot?
What is your time limit on when infornation gets expired?
was Re:Old News
davecb5620@gmail.com
They still continue to work hard to implement the CSS2 spec which came out 8 and a half years ago.
I'm excited to see if they can implement CSS3 in time for my retirement in 30 years.
Keep your node to the grindstone kids, I know you'll get there!
Help me take back Slashdot. When did 'News for Nerds' become 'FUD and Conspiracy Theories for Extremist Nutjobs'?
"In addition, there is a long list of fixed bugs that plagued previous IE browsers for years"
It's be nice if Microsoft provided a list of every single unfixed bug in IE7 as well.
Where were you when the voynix came?
You said almost precisely this comment the day IE 7 came out. I remember laughing at your crying.
You'll still have to cater for IE6 or a loong time, especially since IE7 can't be installed on Windows 2000 or Windows XP SP1...
"The way we can tell it's C# instead of Haskell is because it's nine lines instead of two." -- wadler
Hi all,
:hover events START BEFORE where the link is rendered and END BEFORE the rendered link ends.
IE7 isn't ready yet; it needs more testing!
For example, create a super basic html page. Within the <body> insert a single <p>aragraph, and within that paragraph, insert a(<a href="#">) link (</a>) - insert it somewhere after the start of the paragraph and before the end. E.g.
<body>
<p>This is a <a href="#foo">test link</a> for checking IE7 links</p>
</body>
Okay, view the page. It looks fine. Now Zoom 125%. The underscore below the link is rendered funny, and even better, if you move the mouse over the link, you'll find the mouse
*I believe* if the link has a background colour, then this background is rendered in the wrong place also.
Quite honestly I don't know how MS could've missed this... but there again....
Z.
Only listing shortcomings where support is present in all or nearly all of Firefox, Opera, Safari; the majority of its competition.
But it's still a huge improvement over IE 6 standards-wise, and I think Microsoft did a pretty good job taking their ancient IE 6 code and doing something decent out of it. IE 7 adds support for all CSS selectors, and even handles the + selector better than Firefox, applying styles correctly in dynamic updates.
Maybe with IE 8 they will be even more competitive with the browsers of today, standards-wise.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Did somebody at MS hold a gun to your hand and demand that you use PNG?
Now listen, shee... you're gonna use PNG... and you're gonna like it! Or my six-shooter may have to loose some lead on you, shee? Nyah...
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
I'm surprised nobody has noticed this yet. If you load any page which contains frames, where the frames contain a large amount of HTML (or just text for that matter), the CPU will spike to 100% for some period of time that is related to the amount of HTML within the frame. I've tested this numerous times and it's a huge problem. IE6 does not show this issue at all. Go ahead, try it out. What's really interesting is while it's at 100% CPU usage, it will yield the CPU to other processes (if another process requires some CPU), but not to itself.
I hope they fix it, but something tells me they won't until I drum up some angry mobs.
Tried to hack the installer (update.inf file, to be correct) in order to install it on Win2k. The process starts, but ends saying that the cryptographic services isn't running... Does someone has an idea to bypass this?
... Firefox 2.0 is available on Mozilla's FTP.
o x/releases/2.0/
(I'm using it right now).
http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firef
Y
We have a design spec that we're meant to follow, either we do it in flash or we do it in HTML, CSS with a bit of Javascript and some alpha transparency PNG's.
Which site would you rather go to?
I know which i'd prefer.
I was faced with that exact conundrum a couple of years ago, either I can learn Flash and create a site that is unusable in text browsers, unusable to blind users, unusable to non windows and mac os users and an inability to copy text from the website etc. Or code it in HTML, CSS & Javascript (with a few alpha PNG's) which I already knew. Which the MAJORITY of web devs know.
I created it in HTML, CSS and JavaScript.
That said the site which is still up works fine in IE 7 as well as 6, no need to tweak the JS for the alpha png stuff.
IE7 XSL Transformations are still the same. Writing an XSL stylesheet that transforms the same both in IE and Mozilla is a bit of a paradox. I've figured out ugly workarounds but am still in awe at the level of difficulty when trying to maintain cross-browser compatibility. One thing that I'm wondering about is how IE7 handles a malformed XML document. IE6 has no problem using a document that is not well-formed, whereas Mozilla will complain thoroughly. I guess we'll have to put that to the test.
Have you seen the new IE 7 acid 2 test results? http://www.webstandards.org/files/acid2/test.html# top They made it even better than the old IE. Now there is stuff that moves when you mouse over it and some random scrollbars too! Kudos to microsoft for creativity!
There is actually a work around for IE's lack of transparency support in PNGs. It depends on some clever tricks with CSS and the fact that IE 6's CSS is broken. The only catch is that it is limited to images defined in divs.
/* IE versions prior to 7.0 do not support transparency, so the following is a workaroundi tem_id=217
/* Mozilla ignores crazy MS image filters, so it will skip the following */g eLoader(enabled=true, sizingMethod=scale src='../images/name.png'); /* IE ignores styles with [attributes], so it will skip the following. */ .site_header_name[class] {
taken from: http://www.daltonlp.com/daltonlp.cgi?item_type=1&
*/
#site_header_name {
height: 100px;
width: 702px;
filter:progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.AlphaIma
}
background-image:url(../images/name.png);
}
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
Well, you see, when you fix a bug, you, well, fix the bug. All the CSS hacks out there exploit unfixed bugs, so you see by fixing them, they ruin your hacks. That's why you don't hack. Use conditional comments.
"The need to build the internet comes from something inside us, something programmed... something we can't resist."
They can still run Firefox.
Have you been hiding under a moonrock? :-D IE6 supports PNGs binary transparency, IE7 finaly supports alpha channel as well.
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
SP2 breaks lots of stuff. Besides, on my PC at work I don't go around installing system upgrades... If anything breaks it's my fault for not asking the appropriate department to do it.
Global warming is a cube.
It involves starting the setup procedure, and then replacing the hacked inf with the original before the cryptographic service (yes, it has to be in manual or automatic) can verify it. This is easier to do with a slow computer, of course (you may need to write a batch file if you run a modern processor). At least, this works to install WMP11 under Server 2003. What'll happen with IE7 under W2K is very much a mystery, though I'd be surprised if your explorer shell still worked after completing setup.
I'd try this in a VM first, if I were you.
You're quoting CSS 2.1 Conformance only. The full list of compliance tests (IE6,IE7,FF1.5,Opera 9, impossible to align well):
CSS 2.1 Units 96% 96% Y 97%
CSS 2.1 Importance I I Y Y
CSS 2.1 At-rules 21% 21% 43% Y
CSS 2.1 Basic selectors 23% 64% 86% 77%
CSS 2.1 Pseudo-classes 29% 36% 93% 93%
CSS 2.1 Pseudo-elements 25% 25% 63% 63%
CSS 2.1 Basic properties 55% 58% 97% 97%
CSS 2.1 Print properties 38% 38% 42% 92%
CSS 2.1 Conformance 43% 43% Y 86%
When you look at the grand total at the bottom here you get:
CSS 2.1 support:
IE 6: 51%
IE 7: 57%
Firefox 1.5: 91%
Opera 9: 94%
So, this shows that
a) IE7 is an improvement over IE6 (though admittingly not impressive)
b) Firefox isn't perfect, like you'd be mislead to believe
c) Opera is actually the most standards-compliant browser
But hey, there's lies, damn lies and statistics, but noone would ever use that to try to make closed-source appear worse than it is, and open source better than it is would they?
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
How elitist of you. Meanwhile, we web developers who actually expect to get paid, have to face the reality of the market. Try to pitch this to the CEO of XYZ corp: "Oh, and by the way, 50% of your potential customers will have to change to a different browser." Get real.
Mir tut es leid, Menschen daß Einfältigfehlersuchenbaumfolgendenaffen sind.
No, it doesn't.
At my company, I had to install the IE7Block company wide. Unfortunately one of our primary applications (Primavera Expedition) will only work with IE 6.0, not Firefox, not IE 5.5, not Opera. They wrote the app in both Java and ActiveX. Running the web app with IE7 (any version) causes a C++ runtime error and immediate abort.
I personally use/have been using Opera for around a year now. I love the browser and recommend it to everyone, however for this particular application IE6 is a must, unless we are willing to flush a major business app down the toilet.
I don't like it but I can't change it.
The greatest good of man is daily to converse about virtue - Socrates
> You'll still have to cater for IE6 or a loong time
I'm not planning on it. Once IE7 hits the automatic updates for fully-patched-up users, I'm giving it a month or two and then dropping IE6 support. I'm not going to deliberately *break* IE6, but I'm not going to cater to it either. Win98 users can get Firefox or Opera, and people who refuse to install service packs can go lick a sidewalk.
I already broke down and started using PNG transparency a year or so ago, and IE6 users can just *see* a funny background color behind the images. The alpha channel is the only way to solve certain layout problems, and I was no longer willing to do without it. By the first of the year I'm not going to be willing to hack around the CSS deficiencies in IE6, either. IE7 is better. It's not perfect, but it's better. So my IE testing will focus on version 7.
I imagine I'm not alone. A lot of web developers are utterly fed up with IE6. The upgrade to IE7 is so compelling to web developers that it will *become* compelling to the users, because without it there are going to be a lot of websites that don't display properly. Ordinarily very few web developers in the past several years (except the crazed and rabid lunatic fringe, of course) have wanted to be first-movers on requiring users to upgrade their browsers, but this one is compelling, and additionally it is going out via automatic update, so most users are going to be left without any very good excuse for refusing it. Even the usual laziness excuse won't cut it on this one; all you've gotta do is leave automatic updates turned on and Bob is your uncle. Webmasters aren't going to have a lot of sympathy for users who refuse.
Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
Too late ^^ However, your trick has worked. IE7 has installed itself on the system, asked me to reboot;
I did it, but then things started to go wrong.
It had a problem with IEDKCS32.DLL during the post reboot install. Now, explorer.exe crashes in shlwapi.dll, and more mysteriously, when I run iexplore.exe, a message box appears and tell me that iexplore.exe is not a valid win32 application...
So I sum up: no more IE (don't care, use seamonkey), but no more desktop also (for now?)... which is more embarassing!