IE8 to demand meta-tag to render in full compliance

ThraxThrax 🐌Austin, TX Icrontian
edited January 2008 in Science & Tech
<p>More evidence of Microsoft ruling much of the interweb has bubbled to the surface today, and it's more absurdity in a day that has been jam-packed with it. It seems that IE8 will feature three render modes when it comes to web pages: Two feature IE7-like rendering, but the third will be fully standards-compliant.</p>
<p>Here's where the absurdity comes in: In order to enable the IE8 standards-compliance, the onus will fall to the <em>web developers</em> to <a href="http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/22/1837244&from=rss">embed a meta tag</a> that switches this feature on. Without it, the browser is no better than IE7, leaving the internet to struggle with its broken self.</p>

Comments

  • CBCB Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Der Millionendorf- Icrontian
    edited January 2008
    Plan A: A 'hacking spider' which will forcibly inset the tag into all older html documents currently in place.

    Plan B: Get everyone to use Firefox.


    Which one would be easier?
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited January 2008
    I do so like A.
  • LincLinc Owner Detroit Icrontian
    edited January 2008
    The new issue of A List Apart explains the whole thing very well.

    From Eric Meyer in "A Standardista's Journey":
    Eric Meyer wrote:
    there are crucial differences between “browser sniffing” as we know it and the proposed version targeting. For one thing, “browser sniffing” at present means “writing code to check what browser is being used and make adjustments to the markup/CSS/JS/server response/whatever accordingly.” Version targeting reverses that completely, making it “the browser checking the page to see when it was developed and making adjustments to its behavior accordingly.” In other words, version targeting frees web developers from sniffing and places the onus on browser developers instead.

    That’s not a change to be lightly dismissed. Browser implementors, for all they frustrate us with (often justified) pleas of limited resources, still command far more resources and expertise in regression testing than any of us can muster. Furthermore, browser developers have a far more vested interest in making sure the version targeting works as promised and doesn’t break old sites than site authors do in updating their old sites to work in new browsers.
    I guess the short version is people are saying "well, let's stop and think about this... maybe this could be a good thing after all". The move from IE6 to IE7 broke a lot of websites, and Microsoft doesn't want to do that again.

    Jeremy Keith says "good idea, but bad default":
    I can’t believe I just wrote that sentence. This shouldn’t make any sense:
    Unless you explicitly declare that you want IE8 to behave as IE8, it will behave as IE7.

    That’s madness! If I don’t use the <code>X-UA-Compatible</code> instruction, I won’t get the benefit of any future improvements in Internet Explorer. That sounds like blackmail to me. There is an option to activate whatever is the current browser version—which, of course, should be the default behaviour.

    To which Zeldman replies:
    the many developers who don’t understand or care about web standards, and who only test their CSS and scripts in the latest version of IE, won’t opt in, so their stuff will render in IE8 the same way it rendered in IE7.

    That sounds bad, but it’s actually good, because it means that their “IE7-tested” sites won’t “break” in IE8. Therefore their clients won’t scream. Therefore Microsoft won’t be inundated with complaints which, in the hands of the wrong director of marketing, could lead to the firing of standards-oriented browser engineers on the IE team. The wholesale firing of standards-oriented developers would jerk IE off the web standards path just when it has achieved sure footing. And if IE were to abandon standards, accessible, standards-compliant design would no longer have a chance. Standards only work when all browsers support them. That IE has the largest market share simply heightens the stakes.
    It's fun being a web developer some days :D
  • LincLinc Owner Detroit Icrontian
    edited January 2008
    Just saw something: using the new HTML5 doctype will cause IE8 to use the latest rendering engine, rendering the meta tag moot as well as the "oh noes we'll be using IE7 mode forever" problem. I now regard this as a short-term backwards-compatibility fix that will (hopefully) become useless/unimportant as time passes.
  • LincLinc Owner Detroit Icrontian
    edited January 2008
  • primesuspectprimesuspect Beepin n' Boopin Detroit, MI Icrontian
    edited January 2008
    ?
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited January 2008
    Not funny.
  • LincLinc Owner Detroit Icrontian
    edited January 2008
    I blame the "in" jokes. :-/
  • CBCB Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Der Millionendorf- Icrontian
    edited January 2008
    Internet is not the place for 'in' jokes.
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited January 2008
    Disagree. The internet is one giant web of in jokes.
  • CBCB Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Der Millionendorf- Icrontian
    edited January 2008
    baited.
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited January 2008
    I C WAT U DID THUR

    //edit: We all know you can't stand inside jokes, though. Soooo, not really baited. TRY AGAIN NAO.
  • CBCB Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Der Millionendorf- Icrontian
    edited January 2008
    I'm not sure you do see what I did there, it was a bit of an inside joke, so you might not have gotten it.
Sign In or Register to comment.