[WSG] IE7 standards support very bad according to some
hi, I was under the impression that IE 7's standards support was much improved, but this article, http://www.idealog.us/2006/08/microsoft_drops.html, and the Paul Thurrot article it links to both think it is bad. What are the experiences of folks on this list? cheers, Maarten ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] IE7 standards support very bad according to some
Looks to me like he's blaming ie for his design problems. On www.newscloud.com there is 226 errors returned by the validator. Scrollbars at 800px in all browsers, image distortion and odd text sizes... Bruce Prochnau bkdesign - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 3:03 AM Subject: [WSG] IE7 standards support very bad according to some hi, I was under the impression that IE 7's standards support was much improved, but this article, http://www.idealog.us/2006/08/microsoft_drops.html, and the Paul Thurrot article it links to both think it is bad. What are the experiences of folks on this list? cheers, Maarten ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] IE7 standards support very bad according to some
Quoting Bruce [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Looks to me like he's blaming ie for his design problems. On www.newscloud.com there is 226 errors returned by the validator. Scrollbars at 800px in all browsers, image distortion and odd text sizes... might some of those things not be because of IE(6/7) workarounds? Maarten ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] IE7 standards support very bad according to some
Bruce wrote: Looks to me like he's blaming ie for his design problems. On www.newscloud.com there is 226 errors returned by the validator. Scrollbars at 800px in all browsers, image distortion and odd text sizes... Since I always add a bit of user-preference on any site (minimum font size = 14px), www.newscloud.com looks slightly broken in Firefox 1.5 and Opera 9 - worst in Firefox, and shows the usual weaknesses in IE6 - with text that (mostly) cannot be resized and so on. HTML validation: 207 errors (at the moment). Pretty much a case of designer/coder problems rather than weak browsers, IMO. The upgrade-banner looks rather counter-productive. That site: www.newscloud.com certainly shouldn't have any problems with neither IE6 nor IE7. --- When it comes to IE7 and its improved standard-support: well, Microsoft have added some standard-support in IE7, but not much compared to IE6. Mostly they have fixed bugs, so most of the claimed standard-support in IE6 looks like (more or less) _real_ standard-support in IE7. That's better than nothing, but not much. IE7 should be given a chance in standard compliant mode so one can take advantage of the few improvements it has, but it can't do much as long as we're talking standards. IE7 will still need a few corrections when given anything but the simplest layouts, but the number of corrections will be much smaller than for IE6. Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] IE7 standards support very bad according to some
I was under the impression that IE 7's standards support was much improved, but this article, http://www.idealog.us/2006/08/microsoft_drops.html, and the Paul Thurrot article it links to both think it is bad. On one side, yes, the CSS support in IE 7 has improved quite a bit - fixes for most of the rendering bugs and support for transparent PNG, :hover on all elements, min/max-width/height, CSS2 selectors (child, adjacent, attribute, first-child etc.) and some smaller things. On the other side, IE7 is still a way behind all the other major browsers. Also, Dean Edwards has shown with his IE7 JavaScript library [1], that it's not that hard to make IE to support many more CSS selectors and other stuff, than we see in IE7 - and this is done with JavaScript(!), imagine what could be done by editing the IE rendering engine itself? This makes you think, is Microsoft really trying that hard to improve its CSS support, or has it just making some minor enchancements, that its users have been begging for a long time? [1] http://dean.edwards.name/IE7/overview/ Rene Saarsoo ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] IE7 standards support very bad according to some
Thanks for all the responses so far Rene, Gunlaug, Bruce and Terrence, I have learned alot already from this :-) Maarten Quoting Rene Saarsoo [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I was under the impression that IE 7's standards support was much improved, but this article, http://www.idealog.us/2006/08/microsoft_drops.html, and the Paul Thurrot article it links to both think it is bad. On one side, yes, the CSS support in IE 7 has improved quite a bit - fixes for most of the rendering bugs and support for transparent PNG, :hover on all elements, min/max-width/height, CSS2 selectors (child, adjacent, attribute, first-child etc.) and some smaller things. On the other side, IE7 is still a way behind all the other major browsers. Also, Dean Edwards has shown with his IE7 JavaScript library [1], that it's not that hard to make IE to support many more CSS selectors and other stuff, than we see in IE7 - and this is done with JavaScript(!), imagine what could be done by editing the IE rendering engine itself? This makes you think, is Microsoft really trying that hard to improve its CSS support, or has it just making some minor enchancements, that its users have been begging for a long time? [1] http://dean.edwards.name/IE7/overview/ Rene Saarsoo ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] IE7 standards support very bad according to some
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Quoting Bruce [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Looks to me like he's blaming ie for his design problems. On www.newscloud.com there is 226 errors returned by the validator. Scrollbars at 800px in all browsers, image distortion and odd text sizes... might some of those things not be because of IE(6/7) workarounds? Maarten No. If you disable CSS then Firefox doesn't even render the plain HTML correctly because it's so malformed. I got 209 errors from the HTML validator. The CSS validator can't even validate the page because the markup is broken. As for the page: well, for starters, it is served with an XHTML Doctype, but the CSS uses upper-case names for some elements (e.g. H5.tags A), so that's wrong. I'm not sure what he's trying to achieve with markup like: ulli/li/ul Overall, I'd describe the page as having shoddy markup, and the CSS as having been produced by somebody with a limited understanding of the standards. If he expects it to work, it's his responsibility to do it right first. Granted, nobody's claiming that IE7's CSS 2.1 support is perfect, but the fact that he encountered such problems with his layout should have given him a clue that his code was broken. I think he just gave way to a knee-jerk reaction of OMFG! IE sux!!! and then made a fool of himself by drawing the attention of the world to his lack of craftsmanship. Note that in the blog post you originally cited, he is quoting an article slagging off IE 7's CSS implementation in Beta 1. That version had no CSS bug fixes whatsoever - they came in Beta 2. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] IE7 standards support very bad according to some
Quoting Nick Fitzsimons [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Quoting Bruce [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Looks to me like he's blaming ie for his design problems. On www.newscloud.com there is 226 errors returned by the validator. Scrollbars at 800px in all browsers, image distortion and odd text sizes... might some of those things not be because of IE(6/7) workarounds? Maarten No. If you disable CSS then Firefox doesn't even render the plain HTML correctly because it's so malformed. I got 209 errors from the HTML validator. The CSS validator can't even validate the page because the markup is broken. As for the page: well, for starters, it is served with an XHTML Doctype, but the CSS uses upper-case names for some elements (e.g. H5.tags A), so that's wrong. I'm not sure what he's trying to achieve with markup like: ulli/li/ul Overall, I'd describe the page as having shoddy markup, and the CSS as having been produced by somebody with a limited understanding of the standards. If he expects it to work, it's his responsibility to do it right first. Granted, nobody's claiming that IE7's CSS 2.1 support is perfect, but the fact that he encountered such problems with his layout should have given him a clue that his code was broken. I think he just gave way to a knee-jerk reaction of OMFG! IE sux!!! and then made a fool of himself by drawing the attention of the world to his lack of craftsmanship. haha..great insight :-) Did you comment to his blog? Maarten ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] IE7 standards support very bad according to some
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: lack of craftsmanship. haha..great insight :-) Did you comment to his blog? Maarten No, because one has to register to comment. I don't really have time to give my details to some random guy on the net, just so I can insult his work :-) Anyway, there are already several comments there pointing out things like the validation errors, and they don't seem to have inspired him to act. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] IE7 standards support very bad according to some
Tom Livingston wrote: On 8/9/06 6:36 AM, Nick Fitzsimons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not sure what he's trying to achieve with markup like: ulli/li/ul Maybe it's me. Is the issue was that he had this empty UL sitting around in his code or is there something wrong with this that I am too un-caffinated to see? Was it wrong for the doc-type? I didn't look at his code... I should have shown more of the surrounding markup: this was embedded in another list as the contents of the first list item. In other places, it contains a link to a video or audio file, so I assume his CMS is just too brain-dead to omit it when there's nothing to link to. I removed it using DOM Inspector, and its absence doesn't break the layout. When there _is_ a link there, it has a title attribute but no content, or just a single nbsp; as content, and is then made visible using CSS background images. This is a really bad practice; an icon linking somewhere deserves to be in the page if it's the only visible content for that link. I don't think that site will be getting any awards for accessibility any time soon. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
