Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 25th Feb 2008 22:09 UTC

Thread beginning with comment 302784
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[8]: Comment by handy
by sappyvcv on Thu 28th Feb 2008 06:15
in reply to "RE[7]: Comment by handy"
I think more to the point is that (apart from text-only browsers such as lynx) IE is by far the browser that supports the least of the W3C standards.
You are right, IE supports the least number of W3C standards. As well as it's own standards (though other browsers implement non-W3C standards as well, such as XUL).
But you are missing the point here. You're singling out a specific standard (a NON critical one at that) and criticizing IE for not supporting it. That's ridiculous.
Member since:
2007-02-17
I think more to the point is that (apart from text-only browsers such as lynx) IE is by far the browser that supports the least of the W3C standards.
IE tends to "support" its own non-standards, such as ActiveX, Windows bitmap, WMF and Winforms, rather than the correct device-independent standards for effectively the same functionality.
It is that sort of non-gracious anti-social ant-competitive behaviour that makes life very difficult for web developers, when by rights it should be all standard and well understood and completely browser and platform independent.
It is that sort of non-gracious anti-social ant-competitive behaviour that Microsoft has been called out for once already by the US courts (but somehow escaped any remedy for that), and is about to be called out for it once again this time by the EU.