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 354923
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Sounds good... at first...
by looncraz on Wed 25th Mar 2009 06:30 UTC in reply to "RE: Sounds good... at first..."
Member since:

Well, what others call "levels" I call version increments :-) Though I guess that isn't true as you could then have a version 2 for Level 1.2 ( i.e., version 1 or L 1.2 was buggy ).

Anyways, I did see some mention to the "level" this "level" that, but did not connect the dots, so I must offer my thanks to you for the enlightenment.

In any event, however, I believe then a graduated compliance scale should be devised as to avoid confusion. After all, it would appear that Microsoft ( or this particular talking mouth ) did not understand this whole "level" thing much in the same way that I did not understand.

Acid3 does, however, test for compliance with standards "levels" which have not been agreed upon or finalized, so the issue remains of, in reality, a test going too far.

Maybe we need an "Acid-ISO" conformance test which tests for all current international standards, and doesn't try to jump the gun regarding which tests to include.

We need a cleaner method - one that an end-user can understand. The higher the number the better, calling it Internet 2.0 Compliant would be a great way to foster fair competition.

--The loon

Reply Parent Score: 3