11 Untitled

Rather than saying which version of IE the site is built for… can’t we say when the site was built?

Then IE just needs to say “this site was built before X, but after 2006-10-18, therefore this website must have been built for IE7”.

posted at 02:12 pm on February 19, 2008 by Craig Francis

12 All this assumes that MS will not screw up with th

Does nobody think about the possibility that Microsoft will be unable to maintain this version targetting?

For example, if IE8 scripting has a security problem, it must be fixed, even if it changes the scripting behaviour. So scripts targetted for IE8 might or might not work after this fix. What good is version targetting then?

Another fun part is that Microsoft is about to maintain a huge amount of different rendering and scripting engines. They all have to communicate with each other, for example exanging javascript objects from one iframe to another. Let’s imagine plugins and java, will they also be frozen yet bugfixed at the same time?

This is an insane project on Microsoft’s side. I don’t believe they can fulfill the promise of really freezing a rendering engine.

I remember a time when the WASP favored to include a script on their websites that would tell people that Netscape is junk and users should finally upgrade to a more useful browser. As much as i hate to intimidate users, the time seems right to do it again. It can be done with “one line of extra markup”.

posted at 02:38 pm on February 19, 2008 by Dragan Espenschied

13 Programming vs. Math and Logic Errors

For those who are afraid of the rendering engine not behaving as it did after security holes are fixed: missing buffer allocation, data type validation, and null checks aren’t what formed the ‘quirks’ that made your old sites work properly in IE 5/6.

The math and logic ‘errors’ are the parts of the code that make it render wrong. Adding a null check before IE6 calculates its box model didn’t affect the rendering—it was the change in the math logic.

posted at 04:06 pm on February 19, 2008 by Elijah Taylor

14 Untitled

And even huge companies — for instance, companies like Microsoft — occasionally listen to their customers and try to solve problems related to their products.

There’s no need to be so patronising. We are well aware that, on rare occasions, Microsoft acknowledges the fact that most of the world has despised an aspect of their products for several years and eventually deigns to remove/alter it, cf The Paperclip. We might have more faith in the customer-centricity if they showed evidence of user testing before releasing a new product, and if they reacted quicker when it became blindingly obvious that a feature has been a complete disaster.

Although you’re right, Microsoft do occasionally react to customer feedback … but unfortunately, not more often than that.

Non-standardistas have been writing JScript for years. While the CSS changes in IE7 may have “broken� a site’s layout, IE8’s JavaScript improvements could easily render a site useless. Real DOM support is a game changer. Enabled by default, it would bring many sites to their knees.

So how do these sites that IE8 would ‘break’ fare in Firefox, Safari and Opera? If site owners don’t care about locking out a fifth of users, why would they care about locking out the other four fifths?

posted at 04:19 pm on February 19, 2008 by Stephen Down

15 Cobblers

I am sorry, but however many different ways “A List Apart” tries to explain this to me I’m not going to believe for a second that this is a good thing. These are just some of the problems that won’t simply go away:

• We are asked to assume that Microsoft will implement this system absolutely perfectly for every new version, for ever. How likely is that?
• This is not an “opt-in” at all. In order to make sure the latest standards are supported, we must add markup to our documents (or mess with the HTTP header). If we wish to take advantage of upcoming technologies like SVG, MathML and even HTML5 we will have no choice but to use this new system.
• The META element will be able to override the HTTP header. That is the opposite of what should happen.

• How will this work with IFRAME elements where different rendering systems will co-exist, and (scary stuff) different versions of JavaScript will be able to access the DOMs of these different versions and interact?

I also have an ideological problem with this approach. The introduction of this system will have the effect of slowing down the uptake of web standards, as there will be a reduced incentive to adopt them. This seems contrary to everything that has been preached by the W3C, the Web Standards Project and A List Apart. This is not just a little thing – this is like switching from Coke to Pepsi.

No. Instead of convincing designers and developers to adopt this system, the likes of A List Apart and the Web Standards Project should go on a crusade to get people to switch to better web browsers, and for the non-standards-savvy WYSIWYG users to switch to more compliant generators and content management systems. It is worth noting that the “millions of small business owners, school teachers, pastors, coaches, and so on who create websites every day“ are probably using MS Word or MS Publisher and the dreaded “Save As…HTML” anyway – which means Microsoft can solve much of the problem by fixing their own crappy software.

posted at 04:45 pm on February 19, 2008 by Simon Jessey

16 Untitled

Zeldman: “Version targeting … seems wrong.”

There’s reasons for that, and they were all pointed out to you, over and over again the last time we all had this conversation. You’ve not added anything to your earlier list of fallacious, emotive, and wrong-headed thinking from last time.

Zeldman: “Call me Lewis Carroll, but I’m okay with it.”

Yeah, and Carroll was happy to accept absurd ideas without rational, evidence-based argument for them.

I’ll leave others to more fully deconstruct the attempted justification presented in this article.

posted at 04:51 pm on February 19, 2008 by David One

17 wrong target audience

I was actually in support of the version targeting until I realized that many of the people making the argument in support of it started to claim that the vast majority of people that need it are Intranet developers. If this is truly the case, then the version targeting should be used as an opt-IN for Intranets, and an opt-OUT for regular sites on the Internet. Yes, this might be a bit tricky, but it seems to be the right behavior and the fairest compromise in my opinion. The users that need version targeting the most get it, while the rest of us get what we’re used to, browsers using the best engine possible.

posted at 05:08 pm on February 19, 2008 by Brian LePore

18 I'll have a small Kool-aid, please, no ice.

Seems we’re off to a bit of a nicer start this time around, doesn’t it?

Eloquent and thorough, Jeffrey. We’re kind of conditioned, when we see a lesser-of-the-evils approach coming from a corporate body, to see the “evil” before we see the “lesser.”

If Microsoft’s bottom line means not opting in and getting increased standard support are mutually exclusive options, then it’s not really much of a choice. What you imply, but never explicitly say, is that a scripting “break” that traverses the ‘nets after IE8’s release could, because of IE’s still-disproportionate market share, temporarily frustrate enough typical users as to call into question the viability and usefulness of the medium itself. That’s nasty bad for Microsoft, and just bad for anyone reading this.

Considering that, I’ll hang my UA-compatibles in my server headers, right above my UTF-8s. At least there the guests won’t see them.

posted at 05:36 pm on February 19, 2008 by Chris Grocki

19 The following will happen

1. New prank exploit. forced target site to render in IE7 versus the IE8 or beyond. All you have to do is remove a line.

2. New Exploits with different IE engines renderings on a single page.

3. No reason to ever leave IE7 ever.

4. A world divided. One wold stuck at IE7 with no need to ever grow (the new COBOL) and the modern browser world.

posted at 05:50 pm on February 19, 2008 by David Gutierrez

20 HÃ¥kon Lie, Opera CTO

“If Microsoft can’t live up to the standards of the web, I suggest they leave the browser business.” – http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02/19/hakon_ms_reform_plan/

posted at 06:10 pm on February 19, 2008 by David One