Slashdot Mirror
W3C Says IE9 Is Currently the Most HTML5 Compatible Browser
GIL_Dude writes "The W3C posted results for their latest HTML5 compatibility tests and have found that, so far, IE 9 has the best overall results. 'The tests cover seven aspects of the spec: "attributes," "audio," "video," "canvas," "getElementsByClassName," "foreigncontent," and "xhtml5." The tests do not yet cover web workers, the file API, local storage, or other aspects of the spec. Not do they cover CSS or other standards that have nothing to do with HTML5 but are somehow lumped under HTML5 by the likes of Apple, Google, and Microsoft.'"
Does slashdot work any better in IE9?
For all the flak IE gets, it's actually a great browser. We all know Microsoft make great products and often take the lead when forced to, and now is no different.
It is also the most secure browser by far, what with its inherent use of MAC, and full DEP and ALSR support. Strange, but true.
If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
....to Microsoft, for moving in the right direction of adopting standards. I still hate you, Microsoft, but I hate you less.
Now figure out a way to get people to stop using IE6. (maybe an add-on to IE9 that makes it so you can run your ancient IE6 only apps?)
On one hand, Microsoft managed to produce an excellent product that's almost fully compatible with the latest standards.
On the other hand, they're the same people who's responsible for summoning the Devil's own child into this world (under the trademark of IE6).
I honestly don't know what to feel about them right now.
Perhaps my understanding of "standard" is a bit skewed, but isn't there something wrong when the best that a browser in its 9th version backed by the most powerful software company in the world can do is just be the "most compatible" one out there?
All FTP clients I use are 100% compatible with the FTP standard. I believe Adobe Flash player is 100% compatible with Flash. I think most mail clients are 100% IMAP and POP3 compatible.
Shouldn't standards be straightforward enough so that all parties wishing to comply to them simply can? Shouldn't compatibility with a standard be a floor instead of a ceiling to asymptotically crept towards?
I'm sure I'm missing something here -- what is it?
in the foreigncontent row
Did Microsoft just manage to pull an OpenOfficeXML with the HTML5 standard?
Just tried with latest chromium, it passwed all random tests I clicked on, that the tested chrome failed on.
Apparently you weren't paying attention when IE6 became IE7, nor when IE7 became IE8, and you're certainly not paying attention now when IE8 is about to become IE9.
Microsoft is obviously continually improving their product. If they weren't, this article would not exist.
They are not, however, doing it on the schedule you would like them to do it on, and for some reason in your mind that qualifies as stagnation. Most reasonable people can recognize that this is, in fact, a major improvement in a long line of major improvements, which obviously discredits your claim completely.
Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
I stopped clicking through the tests one-by-one when I came across one that would have been fixed by a simple “if (x1 == x2 && y1 == y2) return;”. I went ahead and scrolled down the list, though... for some reason a lot of the tests near the bottom read “No Result” for many/most browsers, and clicking a test at random (canvas(2d.transformation.scale..zero.html)) that said “No Result” in every column except Safari gave me a 404 error.
I’m not terribly impressed.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
It's all part of their standard operating procedures after all. If they wish to get back on top, they will need to support the standards... then, of course, they will extend on them, get developers to use the extensions and then make sure everyone else looks "broken" again. Seen it all before.
...according to the test developers.
According to wired:
Run IE9 against other aspects of HTML5 and the browser would be decidedly behind its competitors. IE9 lacks support for Web Workers, drag-and-drop features, SVG animations and the File API, all of which are vital components for building useful web applications, and all of which enjoy considerable support in other browsers.
As a CSS guy, this means I find other browsers infuriating. Now that we have Webfonts I want to render ever piece of text with fonts instead of graphics...but getting a banner to just the right size is often impossible without a fractional font size. As a normal user, it means Firefox more often than not looks "wrong," because it's far enough ahead of the curve to be out front alone.
This is the web, not desktop publishing. If you want pixel perfect rendering 100% of the time generate a PDF or PostScript file (or Flash). While CSS has certainly improved the visuals, the sites I like the best are ones that actually still useful when I use lynx/elinks to visit them (e.g., Daring Fireball, Ars Technica).
While I'm a fan of good design, you have the wrong mind set when creating a site if you want the above IMHO. Even in engineering physical things there, are some +/- tolerances; you need to have some "give" in your designs and I think it's true with HTML as well. All of this advanced CSS is nice, but after a certain point you're into the realm of "control freak" designers.
Please remember: web site != desktop publishing. If your layout can't handle a few pixel offset here or there, then it's veered into the realm of "control freak" country.