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 354923
To view parent comment, click here.
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

lemur2 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 ).

That is not it. It doesn't work like that.

IE, as do all other browser, complies with DOM level 1.

DOM level 2 was published in 2000. It hasn't changed at all since. DOM leevel 2 includes DOM level 1, plus extra functions. Your browser still needs to be compliant with DOM level 1 in order to be compliant with DOM level 2. It is like adding an extension to a house ... you still have to have the house in order to have the house plus extensions.

IE doesn't have this, it (alone) is stuck at DOM level 1.

DOM level 3 was published in 2004. AFAIK, no browsers have complied with that as yet. In order to do so, however, they won't have to throw away any of the functionality of DOM level 2.

Edited 2009-03-25 08:17 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

looncraz Member since:

I meant version of Level meaning a bug was discovered in the standard - not an implementation, but the standard itself. This happened before, but I can't remember which it was, and for what reason.

There are also different versions of PNG 1.2, according to WikiPedia.

I actually understand parsers & interpreters ( i.e. browsers ) exceedingly well having written quite a few implementations myself, I just haven't ever had the need to code for standards compliance - I'm a ground-up kinda guy.

--The loon

Reply Parent Score: 2