Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 27th Aug 2008 21:26 UTC, submitted by gonzo
The IE team at Microsoft has released the 2nd beta Internet Explorer 8. Contrary to the first beta, which was aimed at developers, this one one is aimed at normal people like you and me. The list of new features and changes is decent, all focused around three themes (marketing alert): "We focused our work around three themes: everyday browsing (the things that real people do all the time), safety (the term most people use for what we've called 'trustworthy' in previous posts), and the platform (the focus of Beta 1, how developers around the world will build the next billion web pages and the next waves of great services)." Go get it.
Thread beginning with comment 328269
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.
Member since:2005-11-10
Member since:2005-06-29
Member since:2007-02-17
"On what planet is this?
The planet where people with a life couldn't give a single frak about Acidtwothreetestsbogusnonsensehocuspocus. Does it render teh google maps? Facebook? Redtube.com? Good, means it passed the only test that matters: the real world test. " That can't be the same planet full of web developers who incessantly bitch all the time about IE's non-compliance with web standards then, and how they code to the standards and then are force to jump through countless torturous hoops to get it to work with IE ... let alone all different versions of IE.
If all browsers worked to standards and had scalable graphics (also to standards) ... then the web is suddenly "code for one, code for all" ... even when that "all" includes tiny screens on handheld devices.
http://209.85.141.104/search?q=cache:GeTL-A7VD0oJ:www.hpl.hp.com/re...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Device_Independence
http://www.w3.org/TR/di-princ/
It actually matters quite a bit, Thom.
Member since:2005-07-24
Good, means it passed the only test that matters: the real world test.
Well, web standards and and acid tests are more about helping developers than users. Users don't really care if a page doesn't render quite right. They care very much when they click and nothing happens, or enter their user name and password, press the button and nothing happens.
Hopefully, web standards and tests will help developers ensure that happens less frequently in the future. But only if Microsoft gets serious about their javascript compliance, which is not a given.
Edited 2008-08-28 00:05 UTC
Member since:2006-09-25
The planet where people with a life couldn't give a single frak about Acidtwothreetestsbogusnonsensehocuspocus.
Does it render teh google maps? Facebook? Redtube.com?
Good, means it passed the only test that matters: the real world test.
Does it render teh google maps? Facebook? Redtube.com?
Good, means it passed the only test that matters: the real world test.
What if Facebook, RedTube and Google Maps include special code for each browser ?
Member since:2005-11-02
Web designers care a *lot* about "just one pixel". It's 'little' bugs like that which drive even half-assed web developers like me crazy. What if "sometimes" when you ran a command it did almost what you asked, but not quite. Do you accept "occasionally off by one" from a calculator? I wouldn't.
It's critically important--especially on the vertical, where fixing it is harder--that things be sized precisely the way the code says it will and precisely the same way between browsers.
Member since:2007-02-17
Web designers care a *lot* about "just one pixel". It's 'little' bugs like that which drive even half-assed web developers like me crazy. What if "sometimes" when you ran a command it did almost what you asked, but not quite. Do you accept "occasionally off by one" from a calculator? I wouldn't. It's critically important--especially on the vertical, where fixing it is harder--that things be sized precisely the way the code says it will and precisely the same way between browsers.
I think you have somehow drfited miles and miles away from the original concept of presentation over the web in such a way as to be device-independent on the client.
How about starting with the design intent of HTML and the web in the first place:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Html#Semantic_HTML
"Rather, semantic HTML refers to an objective and a practice to create documents with HTML that contain only the author's intended meaning, without any reference to how this meaning is presented or conveyed."
"Semantic HTML also requires complementary specifications and software compliance with these specifications. Primarily, the development and proliferation of CSS has led to increasing support for semantic HTML, because CSS provides designers with a rich language to alter the presentation of semantic-only documents. With the development of CSS, the need to include presentational properties in a document has virtually disappeared. With the advent and refinement of CSS and the increasing support for it in Web browsers, subsequent editions of HTML increasingly stress only using markup that suggests the semantic structure and phrasing of the document, like headings, paragraphs, quotes, and lists, instead of using markup which is written for visual purposes only, like <font>, (bold), and [i] (italics)."
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2007-02-17
Web designers don't care about major, approved web standards functionality but they do care about 1 vertical pixel?
ORLY?
On what planet is this?