Slashdot Mirror


IE 8 Passes Acid2 Test

notamicrosoftlover writes to tell us Channel9 is reporting that Internet Explorer 8 has correctly rendered the Acid2 page in "standards mode". "With respect to standards and interoperability, our goal in developing Internet Explorer 8 is to support the right set of standards with excellent implementations and do so without breaking the existing web. This second goal refers to the lessons we learned during IE 7. IE7's CSS improvements made IE more compliant with some standards and less compatible with some sites on the web as they were coded. Many sites and developers have done special work to work well with IE6, mostly as a result of the evolution of the web and standards since 2001 and the level of support in the various versions of IE that pre-date many standards. We have a responsibility to respect the work that sites have already done to work with IE. We must deliver improved standards support and backwards compatibility so that IE8 (1) continues to work with the billions of pages on the web today that already work in IE6 and IE7 and (2) makes the development of the next billion pages, in an interoperable way, much easier. We'll blog more, and learn more, about this during the IE8 beta cycle." There's also a video interview regarding IE8 development on Channel9."

11 of 555 comments (clear)

  1. Standards Mode? by calebt3 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Internet Explorer 8 has correctly rendered the Acid2 page in "standards mode". Lots of questions raised by this:
    How inconvenient is it to switch into and out of standards mode? Do you have to navigate menus or is there a button on the statusbar? Will it automatically switch between the two, based on whether or not the site demands IE7 or not? Is standards mode on by default?
  2. Re:any standard will do by bwthomas · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That's not necessarily true. There are graceful ways to deprecate commonly used design elements, even those specific to IE (read: hacks). It's been my experience that once someone says, "ok, this still works but it's going away" developers shun it like the plague for anything in active development, and rightly so.

  3. Acid2 Website Problems? by nerdrew · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Is anyone else having trouble with the acid2 page? Safari and Firefox 3.0 beta 1 are failing to render it in the same way.

  4. Remember kids... by sootman · · Score: 5, Interesting
    ... passing the Acid test doesn't mean the browser's perfect. From http://www.webstandards.org/action/acid2/guide/

    Everything that Acid2 tests is specified in a Web standard, but not all Web standards are tested. Acid2 does not guarantee conformance with any specification.
    And, from what I've read before, it tests how browsers handle incorrect code as much as anything else--i.e., if it deals with errors correctly. I'd rather have it handle every bit of the spec correctly in the first place, and if it fails gracefully, that's nice too.

    It'll also be nice it it handles transparent PNGs properly with nothing more than an <img> tag--like how IE/5 Mac did almost eight fucking years ago. Here's how much progress they had made as of 6/2006. (Yeah, it's been a while, and maybe they've fixed that, but c'mon.... it was 2006!) Too bad they lined up the Mac guys against a wall and shot them, ensuring that it would take almost a decade to get that one feature into IE/Win.

    Feel free to correct me if I've made any factual errors in this post.* Flame if you want, but nicely worded, verifiable responses are preferred and worth a lot more to readers in general.

    * aside from the part about shooting the Mac team--I'm (pretty) sure that didn't happen.
    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    1. Re:Remember kids... by icepick72 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      ... passing the Acid test doesn't mean the browser's perfect.


      No but the browsers that do pass are in a higher category all to themselves.

  5. Why fix bugs when the bugs worked better than the by CrackPipePls · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Why fix bugs when the bugs worked better than the fixes? With the standard breaking IE6, random "updates" that makes IE7 css hacks useless, and now a new "standard compliant" IE8 that may or may not contain other bugs The task of writing pages to support IE6, IE7, IE8 will become equivalent to travelling on a mine field, a melting glacier and an active volcano in 3 parallel universes in the same car at the same time

  6. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  7. Re:So let's geek this out by ozmanjusri · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I can't help be slightly suspicious.

    It explains why they've switched to the Word rendering engine for Outlook. The fewer places they're standards compliant, the better for their lockin.

    --
    "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
  8. Re:So let's geek this out by Kelson · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It looks like a server problem, since all previously-passing engines are displaying the same error. More detail in this comment.

  9. Re:Tabs are evil by Peaker · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The reason we need tabs is that:
    1. There's no easy shortcut to opening in new window in the background (so you can switch to it when its loaded).
    2. Tabs let you form a hierarchy of windows (organizing your tabs into groups that are windows).
    3. Tabs namespace the browser windows into its own space, not messing up the other applications' namespaces.
    4. Window switching sucks (The task bar is a bad interface).


    I agree that tabs suck, but unfortunately, they are the best we have right now :-)

    If an easy shortcut to open in a new window existed, and window organization (easily!) into hierarchies was allowed in the general case, such that switching inside any level of the hierarchy was possible, and was convenient (the Window scale effect comes to mind), then tabs would become an unnecessary ad-hoc kludge.
  10. Re:Tabs are evil by uglyduckling · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Think about it why should we use tabs, really?

    Easy. The vast majority of window managers on any OS, when a new window is opened, will give it focus. Most of the time that's probably the wrong thing to do (in my opinion) but that is the default behaviour. I like to browse through pages on Ebay, Wikipedia, Slashdot etc., and when I see a link I like I middle-click on it. In Firefox and IE7 this opens a new tab without switching focus and loads the page in the background. On IE6 it opens a new window (in fact you have to right-click then select open in new window), I then have to ALT-TAB or click back to my original window to carry on browsing. Most people that I've pointed this out to have then tried browsing with tabs for a few days and never gone back. On IE6 if you're browsing with the window maximised then open a link in a new window, the new window will not be maximised, so again I have to mess around to carry on browsing the way I want.

    I'm usually totally against MDI type arrangements, of which tabs I guess are really a derivative. However, I have to say that I find tabbed browsing extremely efficient and intuitive.