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 355120
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

I say this because I remember that Opera announced that it was the first browser to pass ACID3. Later that week, ACID3 itself was tweaked (to fix some problem or whatever). That tweak caused Opera to no longer pass ACID3. The Opera team made a new release to re-pass ACID3. This showed that Opera coded against ACID3, not against the "standards" that ACID3 is supposed to test. Opera passes ACID3, but does it really support the "standards" in question in a robust manner? Not if they have to update Opera whenever ACID3 changes. Microsoft could have done like Opera did and code against ACID3, even if they didn't robustly support the standards in general. But it's a waste of time, means nothing except a checkbox on the "features" list. Let the "standards" become real standards, then support them accordingly, I say.


Here is a list of the standards that Acid3 is meant to test:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid3#Standards_tested

Acid3 isn't the standard. Acid3 is a test of compliance to selected levels of the standards ... and at one stage one of the tests may have been flawed, and subsequently corrected. That doesn't mean the standard was flawed, nor does it mean that the standard was changed.

From the link:
"The test was officially released on 3 March 2008. A guide and commentary was expected to follow within a few months, however, as of September 2008 it has not yet been released. The announcement that the test is complete means only that it is to be considered "stable enough" for actual use; if problems and bugs are found, it will still be modified to fix it. The test has already been modified to fix several issues including issues regarding to sub-pixel positioning, SVG surrogate pairs and performance. On 26 March 2008—the day both Opera and WebKit teams announced a 100/100 score—developers of WebKit contacted main Acid3 developer Ian Hickson about a critical bug in the Acid3 that presumably may have forced a violation of the SVG 1.1 standard to pass; thus Hickson proceeded to fix it with the help of Cameron McCormack, member of W3C's SVG Working Group.

By the end of March 2008, early development versions of the Presto and WebKit layout engines scored 100/100 on the test and rendered the test page correctly. Presto still has performance issues in producing a smooth animation in the test, thus it has not passed the Acid3 test yet. As of build r36882, WebKit produces a smooth animation on the reference hardware, and thus passes the Acid3 test. Firefox developers had been preparing for the imminent release of Firefox 3, as a result they had focused on stability rather than passing the Acid3 test. Microsoft, developers of the Internet Explorer browser, said that Acid3 does not map to the goal of Internet Explorer 8 and that IE8 will improve only some of the standards being tested by Acid3.

On 22 April 2008, Hickson again fixed a bug in the Acid3 test discovered by a Mozilla developer. This change possibly invalidates the previously reported scores of 100/100 for development versions of Presto and WebKit. On 29 September 2008, David Baron raised an issue with the CSS Working Group concerning media queries that might cause the test to change again."


As I said, bugs were in the Acid3 test, not in the standards themselves, which AFAIK haven't changed since first publication.

Please indicate which of these levels (as named in the Acid3 test scope) of the standards has, in any way, changed since their publication dates, which in most cases was from between five to eight or nine years ago.

Note: If the XTHML test includes anything from HTML 5, then that would be one such case. Perhaps the only one.

Note also: I am in full agreement with the developers of IE8 when they said "that Acid3 does not map to the goal of Internet Explorer 8". Full agreement. IE8 certainly has no goal of standards compliance, particularly when it comes to any long-published standards that ages ago specified functionality that Microsoft have put instead into non-standard proprietary Silverlight.

Reply Parent Score: 3