Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 24th Mar 2009 23:26 UTC, submitted by inkslinger
Internet Explorer Recently, Microsoft released Internet Explorer 8, which boasted much better standards compliance than previous iterations of the browser. While it passed the Acid2 test, IE8 failed miserably in the Acid3 test, and many people criticised Microsoft for it. Microsoft Australia's Nick Hodge has stated that Microsoft purposefully decided not to support Acid3, because the test tests against draft standards.
Permalink for comment 354920
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Sounds good... at first...
by lemur2 on Wed 25th Mar 2009 06:04 UTC in reply to "Sounds good... at first..."
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

What we need is a web standards version numbering system outside of these tests. The version should increment on a fairly rigid schedule, every year.

Web Standard Version 2009 would require the ISO version of SVG 1.1, CSS 2.1, PNG 1.2, etc... Any new major browser version being released would be expected to have support for WSV-2009.


The numbers after the W3C standards don't specify versions in the normal sense ... they specify levels.

DOM level 1 is the elementary level of the DOM standard. IE complies with this, and it is part of acid 1 tests.

DOM level 2 is the next level of the DOM standard. It specifies extra functionality over DOM 1. It does not supplant DOM level 1. Opera, Firefox, Safari and Chrome comply with this as well as DOM 1. IE8 does not. This is tested in Acid 3.

DOM level 3 is what the W3C is working on now. This is the bit in draft. It is functionality in addition to DOM level 1 and DOM level 2, it does not supplant the earlier levels.

It is a similar story for SVG. SVG 1.0 is the first level. SVG 1.1 is a higher level, with additional functions. This is tested in Acid 3. Opera, Firefox, Safari and Chrome comply with this level. IE8 does not. SVG level 1.2 is what the W3C is working on now, and this is draft.

The numbers are incremental levels of functionality in the (static) standard, they are not incremental versions of the standards. Later increments do not affect earlier increments, they just add functionality.

In other words ... Microsoft's stated excuse for not complying with Acid3 is a crock. Utter BS. Liar, liar, house on fire.

Edited 2009-03-25 06:04 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 7