Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 2nd Nov 2010 20:03 UTC
Internet & Networking Every now and then, you get these news item that make you feel like something's wrong. The item doesn't make sense, shouldn't be possible, and yet it is. Despite Microsoft's newfound commitment to web standards, it's still incredibly unnerving to see things like this - the W3C's first HTML5 compliance test, in which Internet Explorer 9 Platform Preview 6 outdoes all other browsers.
Thread beginning with comment 448344
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Weird weird weird
by vodoomoth on Wed 3rd Nov 2010 10:17 UTC
vodoomoth
Member since:
2010-03-30

The whole test looks like it has been tailored to be misleading. I came to that conclusion when I read the next message on the thread (that Kroc linked to in the 2nd comment to the story):


> It's also strange that the results include alpha/beta/preview versions of most browsers, but the stable version of Safari.

Isn't this best solved by someone from Apple providing the most recent results for whatever alpha/beta/preview version of Safari that you want represented?

Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada


It's unbelievable that he has the gall to write such a thing. I can only guess but I don't see other browser vendors collaborating in the production/publication of those conformance tests: Opera's Anne van Kesteren called it "extremely silly", Apple's Stachowiak throws in a tepid "We should probably be cautious about the chance of creating PR events based on incorrect information".

On second reading, the most weird thing is W3C's Le Hegaret's own words ("Thank you all for sending test results.") imply: other vendors ran the tests and returned results to the w3c... I instantly thought "How stupid of them. In these conditions, I don't see how to blame Microsoft for reaping PR profit". But I kept on reading the email thread and a few messages later came across this from Apple's Stachowiak:

I have no objection to anyone collecting test results for any version of Safari so long as they are not labelled as official. Certainly no one asked Apple's permission to collect or publish the test results so far.

and this:

Realistically speaking the test suite isn't even 0.1%
complete yet
.

wtf is going on with the w3c?

Last message in the thread, apparently by the person who collected the results:

Apologies to all.

That was just a transmission of a test result to the public list.
I did not expect that this result is published immediately.

Maybe one of the websites that started and fueled the fuss are watching the w3c public list?

Reply Score: 7

RE: Weird weird weird
by sparkyERTW on Wed 3rd Nov 2010 12:13 in reply to "Weird weird weird"
sparkyERTW Member since:
2010-06-09

Yeah, it's pretty clear that this was just some extremely preliminary test results that wasn't intended to make it to the media.

Thom, perhaps an update to your article is required, stating just how unofficial and unrepresentative these test results are - as indicated by those responsible for them.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Weird weird weird
by Soulbender on Wed 3rd Nov 2010 14:39 in reply to "Weird weird weird"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Certainly no one asked Apple's permission to collect or publish the test results so far.


Apple's permission is not required.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Weird weird weird
by vodoomoth on Wed 3rd Nov 2010 17:53 in reply to "RE: Weird weird weird"
vodoomoth Member since:
2010-03-30

And how does this meaningless comment of yours tell us what YOU think of the story? what your contribution to the discussion is? Have you read the email thread and put the different quotes in context?

Reply Parent Score: 2