Comments on: Opting-in to standards support http://www.webstandards.org/2008/01/22/ie8-will-see-the-smile/ Working together for standards Wed, 27 Mar 2013 12:19:03 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Matthias http://www.webstandards.org/2008/01/22/ie8-will-see-the-smile/comment-page-1/#comment-61259 Matthias Sat, 16 Feb 2008 22:00:07 +0000 http://www.webstandards.org/2007/12/19/ie8-will-see-the-smile/#comment-61259 I don't get it. The problem is not a technical one, it's a human one: No matter how much time you give developers to come around to proper HTML "on their own schedule" (as the Microsoft blog entry has it), some of them never will. Not if they can get away with shoddy work. You can't fix that with a META tag. It seems to me that you already learned this lesson with the Doctype Switch. As you write in your blog entry: "The DOCTYPE switch assumes that if you are using a valid DOCTYPE for a “modern” language (e.g. HTML 4), you know what you’re doing and want the browser to render in standards mode. That assumption could have worked out all right, had it not been for authoring tool makers who—with the best intentions and under pressure from us (the web standards community and WaSP, in particular)—decided to include valid DOCTYPEs in new documents by default, thereby crippling the DOCTYPE switch because it wasn’t an explicit opt-in." So the Doctype Switch failed because it fixed the wrong problem - and yet you think you can "fix" that with yet another strange feature? What will you do when that new feature also fails -as it must, because people never change-? Microsoft's (and our) money would be much better spent in training developers to write proper HTML. I'm surprised the WASP lost its sting. I don’t get it.

The problem is not a technical one, it’s a human one: No matter how much time you give developers to come around to proper HTML “on their own schedule” (as the Microsoft blog entry has it), some of them never will. Not if they can get away with shoddy work. You can’t fix that with a META tag.

It seems to me that you already learned this lesson with the Doctype Switch. As you write in your blog entry:

“The DOCTYPE switch assumes that if you are using a valid DOCTYPE for a “modern” language (e.g. HTML 4), you know what you’re doing and want the browser to render in standards mode.

That assumption could have worked out all right, had it not been for authoring tool makers who—with the best intentions and under pressure from us (the web standards community and WaSP, in particular)—decided to include valid DOCTYPEs in new documents by default, thereby crippling the DOCTYPE switch because it wasn’t an explicit opt-in.”

So the Doctype Switch failed because it fixed the wrong problem – and yet you think you can “fix” that with yet another strange feature? What will you do when that new feature also fails -as it must, because people never change-?

Microsoft’s (and our) money would be much better spent in training developers to write proper HTML. I’m surprised the WASP lost its sting.

]]> By: Neues Meta-Tag | Geldblog http://www.webstandards.org/2008/01/22/ie8-will-see-the-smile/comment-page-1/#comment-60457 Neues Meta-Tag | Geldblog Tue, 05 Feb 2008 23:12:48 +0000 http://www.webstandards.org/2007/12/19/ie8-will-see-the-smile/#comment-60457 [...] Hier der Link: ie8-will-see-the-smile socialize it Diese Icons verlinken auf Bookmark Dienste bei denen Nutzer neue Inhalte finden und mit anderen teilen können. [...] [...] Hier der Link: ie8-will-see-the-smile socialize it Diese Icons verlinken auf Bookmark Dienste bei denen Nutzer neue Inhalte finden und mit anderen teilen können. [...]

]]> By: La domo de karotoj » Nova meta-etikedo por norma sekvado http://www.webstandards.org/2008/01/22/ie8-will-see-the-smile/comment-page-1/#comment-59811 La domo de karotoj » Nova meta-etikedo por norma sekvado Fri, 25 Jan 2008 21:51:53 +0000 http://www.webstandards.org/2007/12/19/ie8-will-see-the-smile/#comment-59811 [...] Ĉar Esplorilo ŝanĝas aferojn en ĉiu eldono kaj tio “rompas” iujn TTT-ejojn, Mikrosofto kunlaboris kun iuj (sed ne ĉiuj) WaSP-anoj liveri novan manieron per kiu la TTT-legilo povas certi pri la normeco de paĝo, per nova meta-etikedo. [...] [...] Ĉar Esplorilo ŝanĝas aferojn en ĉiu eldono kaj tio “rompas” iujn TTT-ejojn, Mikrosofto kunlaboris kun iuj (sed ne ĉiuj) WaSP-anoj liveri novan manieron per kiu la TTT-legilo povas certi pri la normeco de paĝo, per nova meta-etikedo. [...]

]]> By: Mr K PositionMakers http://www.webstandards.org/2008/01/22/ie8-will-see-the-smile/comment-page-1/#comment-59754 Mr K PositionMakers Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:04:15 +0000 http://www.webstandards.org/2007/12/19/ie8-will-see-the-smile/#comment-59754 I have to agree that IE always breaks something with new versions. Hopefully this starts to change in the near future (like NOW). I have to agree that IE always breaks something with new versions. Hopefully this starts to change in the near future (like NOW).

]]> By: Olly http://www.webstandards.org/2008/01/22/ie8-will-see-the-smile/comment-page-1/#comment-59707 Olly Wed, 23 Jan 2008 17:39:27 +0000 http://www.webstandards.org/2007/12/19/ie8-will-see-the-smile/#comment-59707 <a href="http://www.webstandards.org/2008/01/22/ie8-will-see-the-smile/#comment-59624" rel="nofollow">@David Zülke</a><blockquote>This is nonsense. Why not fix it properly by enabling standards mode for ... the upcoming HTML5.</blockquote>They have, for HTML5 at least. See <a href="http://ejohn.org/blog/html5-doctype/" rel="nofollow">John Resig's post on the subject</a>. @David Zülke
This is nonsense. Why not fix it properly by enabling standards mode for … the upcoming HTML5.

They have, for HTML5 at least. See John Resig’s post on the subject.

]]> By: Internet Explorer 8 und Webstandards « Internet « Quirksmode, Microsoft http://www.webstandards.org/2008/01/22/ie8-will-see-the-smile/comment-page-1/#comment-59701 Internet Explorer 8 und Webstandards « Internet « Quirksmode, Microsoft Wed, 23 Jan 2008 15:36:03 +0000 http://www.webstandards.org/2007/12/19/ie8-will-see-the-smile/#comment-59701 [...] Doch bekommen die Redmonder Angst vor der eigenen Courage und wollen einen neuen Meta-Tag einführen, um die Fehler, die mit dem IE 6 gemacht wurden, weiterhin im Web am Leben halten zu können. Ein klein wenig verständlich, dass MS die Geister beschwichtigen will, die es selber rief. Aber: Kann man wirklich Webseiten ernst nehmen, die nur für den IE6 designt wurden und bei modernen Browsern schlapp machen? Muss man als Webdesigner in den Meta-Tags wirklich Webstandards bewusst in den Metas aktivieren müssen, damit der Internet Explorer endlich einmal tut, was er tun sollte? [...] [...] Doch bekommen die Redmonder Angst vor der eigenen Courage und wollen einen neuen Meta-Tag einführen, um die Fehler, die mit dem IE 6 gemacht wurden, weiterhin im Web am Leben halten zu können. Ein klein wenig verständlich, dass MS die Geister beschwichtigen will, die es selber rief. Aber: Kann man wirklich Webseiten ernst nehmen, die nur für den IE6 designt wurden und bei modernen Browsern schlapp machen? Muss man als Webdesigner in den Meta-Tags wirklich Webstandards bewusst in den Metas aktivieren müssen, damit der Internet Explorer endlich einmal tut, was er tun sollte? [...]

]]> By: Bb’s RealTech | Bobbing Heads and the IE8 Meta Tag http://www.webstandards.org/2008/01/22/ie8-will-see-the-smile/comment-page-1/#comment-59636 Bb’s RealTech | Bobbing Heads and the IE8 Meta Tag Tue, 22 Jan 2008 19:42:18 +0000 http://www.webstandards.org/2007/12/19/ie8-will-see-the-smile/#comment-59636 [...] I was astonished to read the A List Apart article Beyond DOCTYPE: Web Standards, Forward Compatibility, and IE8 and even more astonished to read compliance with the message from Eric Meyer, Molly Holzschlag, and the WaSP organization. How the mighty have fallen is so very cliché but, oh, how appropriate. According to Aaron Gustafson, who wrote the ALA article, the plan is rather than depend on DOCTYPE to trigger quirks and standard mode for page rendering–a necessity generated by Microsoft’s IE6 by the way–we all add a meta tag to our pages that locks the page into a specific browser rendering. For instance, the following would lock a page into IE8 rendering: <meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=8" /> [...] [...] I was astonished to read the A List Apart article Beyond DOCTYPE: Web Standards, Forward Compatibility, and IE8 and even more astonished to read compliance with the message from Eric Meyer, Molly Holzschlag, and the WaSP organization. How the mighty have fallen is so very cliché but, oh, how appropriate. According to Aaron Gustafson, who wrote the ALA article, the plan is rather than depend on DOCTYPE to trigger quirks and standard mode for page rendering–a necessity generated by Microsoft’s IE6 by the way–we all add a meta tag to our pages that locks the page into a specific browser rendering. For instance, the following would lock a page into IE8 rendering: <meta http-equiv=”X-UA-Compatible” content=”IE=8″ /> [...]

]]> By: Geoffrey Sneddon http://www.webstandards.org/2008/01/22/ie8-will-see-the-smile/comment-page-1/#comment-59631 Geoffrey Sneddon Tue, 22 Jan 2008 17:21:28 +0000 http://www.webstandards.org/2007/12/19/ie8-will-see-the-smile/#comment-59631 @David: What if there is a single bug that websites end up relying upon in IE8 in IE8 Standards Mode? Note that HTML 4.01 and CSS 2.0 (the current recommendations) are both too vague to be interoperably implemented. We then end up with the choice to break everything, or to add a compat. switch. Oh well, been there before. @David: What if there is a single bug that websites end up relying upon in IE8 in IE8 Standards Mode? Note that HTML 4.01 and CSS 2.0 (the current recommendations) are both too vague to be interoperably implemented. We then end up with the choice to break everything, or to add a compat. switch. Oh well, been there before.

]]> By: David Zülke http://www.webstandards.org/2008/01/22/ie8-will-see-the-smile/comment-page-1/#comment-59624 David Zülke Tue, 22 Jan 2008 16:39:32 +0000 http://www.webstandards.org/2007/12/19/ie8-will-see-the-smile/#comment-59624 This is nonsense. Why not fix it properly by enabling standards mode for XHTML sent with application/xhtml+xml and the upcoming HTML5. That solves it properly, once and for all, without anyone having to touch existing markup. An Apache directive or two lines of code are enough to sent that header back for browser that send the same in an Accept request header (which IE would then have to do, of course). This is nonsense. Why not fix it properly by enabling standards mode for XHTML sent with application/xhtml+xml and the upcoming HTML5. That solves it properly, once and for all, without anyone having to touch existing markup. An Apache directive or two lines of code are enough to sent that header back for browser that send the same in an Accept request header (which IE would then have to do, of course).

]]>