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.
Thread beginning with comment 354887
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Once in a blue moon...
by dvhh on Wed 25th Mar 2009 01:12 UTC in reply to "Once in a blue moon..."
dvhh
Member since:
2006-03-20

personally I always though that ACID browser test were a dick contest anyway. But their first focus were on interoperability ( it sure does trails away from this one ) between browser, now it seem that browser vendor target their rendering engine/DOM for this test.

So what are today's standard anyway? the (first) browser war didn't helped that much because of lazy web designer / browser dev, what about this (second) browser war it seems that webkit is gaining more and more traction because of the support of not yet standard features ?

current de-facto standard :
- full HTML support ( up to 4.1 ) / features of the html 5
- full XHTML support
- plugin support ( ie : adobe slow ass flash )
- full CSS 2.1
- CSS 3 support ( webkit devs will certainly define them while other would provide "compatible" implementation ) ( benchmark should be http://www.css3.info/preview/ ) ( example of fragmentation over not yet standard http://www.css3.info/preview/background-size/)
- SVG support
- fast jit javascript engine ( why not aot ?)
- XmlHttp async call support
- Canvas support ( needed to replace flash in 40% of the cases)
- PNG transparencies

And that might be all.

Anyway now Microsoft seem to be in the old Netscape place in this war. It is not about being standard, it's more about being future proof and regarding the deployment rate of IE7, how long would the user have to wait for a CSS 3 compliant IE 8.1/9 after the "validation" from the W3C ?

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Once in a blue moon...
by lemur2 on Wed 25th Mar 2009 01:47 in reply to "RE: Once in a blue moon..."
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

So what are today's standard anyway?


This is as good a list as any:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web_Consortium#Standards

This is the set that is tested by Acid3:

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

Despite what Microsoft claims, there is a fairly good match here.

DOM, for example, is tested by Acid3 for compliance at level 2.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Document_object_model

"DOM Level 2 was published in late 2000. It introduced the "getElementById" function as well as an event model and support for XML namespaces and CSS. DOM Level 3, the current release of the DOM specification, published in April 2004, added support for XPath and keyboard event handling, as well as an interface for serializing documents as XML."


Now it seems that Microsoft might be being a bit sneaky here (who would have thought?). DOM level 3 is current, and that may well still be draft, but the Acid3 test verifies compliance only up to level 2. Microsoft passes DOM level 1, but most other browsers are up to DOM level 2, and that is all that is being asked for ... only IE fails to comply. DOM level 2 isn't draft.

Similar story for SVG. The Acid3 test looks for complaince with SVG 1.1.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scalable_Vector_Graphics

"SVG 1.1 became a W3C Recommendation on January 14, 2003."


The (draft) SVG standard in development is SVG 1.2. But a browser need not implement SVG 1.2 in order to pass Acid3, SVG 1.1 is sufficient.

IE8 does not implement SVG at all.

Reply Parent Score: 16