Comments on: A standards truce in the browser war?

Some Web developers see signs of change at Microsoft after years of taking the giant to task over IE.

[System Tyrant]

I just realized.

In my opinion it's developers that choose the standard. In my reading I never hear about IE, Firefox, etc. users complaining about standards. It's always the developers looking for a faster, easier, and cheaper way to create good websites. They are the ones complaining to Microsoft about its lack of support for W3C standards.

I suppose my thinking here is that while we can all pick our favorite browser and complain about the others it really comes down to the developers jobs. If all developers are able to follow a set and aggreed upon standard (beit IE or W3C) then they spend more time creating engaging sites that cost less and less time trying to make it work on different platforms.

Here is a good example of what is possible if all browsers used CSS standards right.

http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/css/edge/complexspiral/demo.html

(NOTE: this wont work in IE. If you want it to see it the way it is suppose to be you will have to download Firefox or Opera 8. I used those to because those are the only 'other' browser I have on my computer and this page worked in both.)

[tsm26]

Just for clarification

While IE is still the biggest culprit in not supporting CSS1 properly, having many positioning and inheritance problems, this pressure to support standards is good for all browsers. Until recently Mozilla had their own opacity style called moz-opacity. Even IE just had opacity, which Mozilla finally started supporting. Also, the standards board shouldn't be the final say on standards. What we need is for all the browser companies to agree on the standards. If they want to change things, then they need to present it to the standards board and work it out.

[System Tyrant]

I just realized.

In my opinion it's developers that choose the standard. In my reading I never hear about IE, Firefox, etc. users complaining about standards. It's always the developers looking for a faster, easier, and cheaper way to create good websites. They are the ones complaining to Microsoft about its lack of support for W3C standards.

I suppose my thinking here is that while we can all pick our favorite browser and complain about the others it really comes down to the developers jobs. If all developers are able to follow a set and aggreed upon standard (beit IE or W3C) then they spend more time creating engaging sites that cost less and less time trying to make it work on different platforms.

Here is a good example of what is possible if all browsers used CSS standards right.

http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/css/edge/complexspiral/demo.html

(NOTE: this wont work in IE. If you want it to see it the way it is suppose to be you will have to download Firefox or Opera 8. I used those to because those are the only 'other' browser I have on my computer and this page worked in both.)

[tsm26]

Just for clarification

While IE is still the biggest culprit in not supporting CSS1 properly, having many positioning and inheritance problems, this pressure to support standards is good for all browsers. Until recently Mozilla had their own opacity style called moz-opacity. Even IE just had opacity, which Mozilla finally started supporting. Also, the standards board shouldn't be the final say on standards. What we need is for all the browser companies to agree on the standards. If they want to change things, then they need to present it to the standards board and work it out.

[gfsdfge]

If you have 90%, you are the standard.

It's crazy to say, "We did a workaround for IE". It is 90%+ of the market. You did workarounds for the others. I don't care what any committee, organization, or consortium says. If your boss said "I want a web site and NO workarounds", would you build it so less than 10% of the people could us it? Think reality not spin, hype, and wishful thinking.

[System Tyrant]

Thinking in circles.

90% market share doesn't dictate a standard. It does, however, tend to direct the flow of developers.

I think workarounds depend upon your view of what is being done. People who create websites for IE would be creating a workaround for Firefox and the other browsers. However, creating sites based on the W3C recommendations that aren't supported by IE would be creating a workaround to make it work in IE.

In my understanding of the system. Nobody creates a standard. The W3C creates recommendations for standards. It is up to web developers and browser developers to agree upon what is "standard" language. It is possible to have competing standards.

Truthfuly, I think if W3C had nothing more than CSS1 you probably would here as much about standard compatibility. However, with CSS2 and comming soon CSS3 developers want the ability to use them. As far as I know none of the browsers fully support CSS2 and at best only 95% of CSS1.

The fact is that IE isn't supported on anything outside of the Windows platform. The fact is that IE's poor support of anything outside of it's own extensions is one of many reason it gets a lot of flack. The fact is that no browsers is perfect no matter how much you want it to be. The fact is a lot of developers don't want to create workarounds for any browser. The fact is that web developers who do it for a living are going to be required to support more than one browser. The fact is that comparing what IE has to offer versus what the W3C's recommendations have to offer show IE comming up wanting quite a bit.

[Steve Jordan]

Wrong, Flatlander.

Standards are in place so all browsers, all coders and all viewers will have the same experience, no matter what browser they use, worldwide. IE may outnumber all other browsers, but that doesn't make it any standard... that just makes it dominant in number. (And NOTE: It's not the dominant browser in every country.)

IE code is specifically designed to make Microsoft more profit, W3C and standards be damned. Ignoring standards practices and causing undue hardship to the industry for their own selfish ends, just makes MS a bully. It doesn't make them right.

Absolutely Correct

MS has 90% of the market. IE *is* the standard. Just because some guy in a dorm room in Vienna says it isnt 'the standard' doesnt make it so.

[gfsdfge]

If you have 90%, you are the standard.

It's crazy to say, "We did a workaround for IE". It is 90%+ of the market. You did workarounds for the others. I don't care what any committee, organization, or consortium says. If your boss said "I want a web site and NO workarounds", would you build it so less than 10% of the people could us it? Think reality not spin, hype, and wishful thinking.

[System Tyrant]

Thinking in circles.

90% market share doesn't dictate a standard. It does, however, tend to direct the flow of developers.

I think workarounds depend upon your view of what is being done. People who create websites for IE would be creating a workaround for Firefox and the other browsers. However, creating sites based on the W3C recommendations that aren't supported by IE would be creating a workaround to make it work in IE.

In my understanding of the system. Nobody creates a standard. The W3C creates recommendations for standards. It is up to web developers and browser developers to agree upon what is "standard" language. It is possible to have competing standards.

Truthfuly, I think if W3C had nothing more than CSS1 you probably would here as much about standard compatibility. However, with CSS2 and comming soon CSS3 developers want the ability to use them. As far as I know none of the browsers fully support CSS2 and at best only 95% of CSS1.

The fact is that IE isn't supported on anything outside of the Windows platform. The fact is that IE's poor support of anything outside of it's own extensions is one of many reason it gets a lot of flack. The fact is that no browsers is perfect no matter how much you want it to be. The fact is a lot of developers don't want to create workarounds for any browser. The fact is that web developers who do it for a living are going to be required to support more than one browser. The fact is that comparing what IE has to offer versus what the W3C's recommendations have to offer show IE comming up wanting quite a bit.

[Steve Jordan]

Wrong, Flatlander.

Standards are in place so all browsers, all coders and all viewers will have the same experience, no matter what browser they use, worldwide. IE may outnumber all other browsers, but that doesn't make it any standard... that just makes it dominant in number. (And NOTE: It's not the dominant browser in every country.)

IE code is specifically designed to make Microsoft more profit, W3C and standards be damned. Ignoring standards practices and causing undue hardship to the industry for their own selfish ends, just makes MS a bully. It doesn't make them right.

Absolutely Correct

MS has 90% of the market. IE *is* the standard. Just because some guy in a dorm room in Vienna says it isnt 'the standard' doesnt make it so.

[Steve Jordan]

Developers: Just STOP writing IE code.

IMO developers never should have written non-standard workarounds, ever. If they'd stood their ground and refused to code non-compliant HTML, IE would have been forced to comply with W3C standards. But developers let MS bribe or con them into writing IE code, and here we are.

Developers: Forget browser brands. Just code to W3C standards, and let the browsers worry about complying.

Why?

Why? I couldnt care less about the 'standards'. I want to reach a lot of people, and give them nice looking sites. So while my sites downgrade nicely to be backward compatible with other browsers, I dont hesitate to use filters and other cool IE only tricks when they'd fit in a page's design.

Why dont the other browsers instead try to match IE's capabilities?

[gfsdfge]

and you will be fired

Do you have a job? Do you want to keep it? I'm really starting to think that off shoring is a wonderful thing.

[Steve Jordan]

Developers: Just STOP writing IE code.

IMO developers never should have written non-standard workarounds, ever. If they'd stood their ground and refused to code non-compliant HTML, IE would have been forced to comply with W3C standards. But developers let MS bribe or con them into writing IE code, and here we are.

Developers: Forget browser brands. Just code to W3C standards, and let the browsers worry about complying.

Why?

Why? I couldnt care less about the 'standards'. I want to reach a lot of people, and give them nice looking sites. So while my sites downgrade nicely to be backward compatible with other browsers, I dont hesitate to use filters and other cool IE only tricks when they'd fit in a page's design.

Why dont the other browsers instead try to match IE's capabilities?

[gfsdfge]

and you will be fired

Do you have a job? Do you want to keep it? I'm really starting to think that off shoring is a wonderful thing.

[System Tyrant]

Gettin Silly

This argument about whether IE sets the standard or doesn't is getting tiresome and old. The fact is that neither IE or W3C really set any standards. At best they create recommendations for standards.

The standard is set when developers decide on a singular language. As far as I can tell a lot of developers would really like IE and every other browser to follow the W3C recommendations.

It is possible to create much more appealing and engaging sites using the W3C recommendations than those of IE. One of the best example I can think of is CSS popup menus. When properly created they take less code than scripting, can be changed on the fly, and are compatible with text browsers. IE doesn't support this in anyway. This is just one example of how the W3C's recommendations are far better than Microsofts.

Simply put 10% of the internet using population is still a very large group of people. Although I have not facts or figures to back up this statement, I believe the majority of developers and browser companies have spoken. I believe they have chosen the W3C recommendations to be the standard language for website creation.

I would like anybody who want to to visit this page using IE and Firefox and tell me what they think.
http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/css/edge/complexspiral/demo.html

[tsm26]

CSS popup menus in IE

Well, CSS popups and other things like changing a background color on a hover without it being a link can be done in IE, but it often takes a lot of nasty javascript code. Sometimes the code gets so crazy I just don't follow it at all. This is definitely a bad thing, but it can be done. For an example go here http://www.phpguru.org/static/dyncalendar.html. Cool free calendar code by the way.

[System Tyrant]

Gettin Silly

This argument about whether IE sets the standard or doesn't is getting tiresome and old. The fact is that neither IE or W3C really set any standards. At best they create recommendations for standards.

The standard is set when developers decide on a singular language. As far as I can tell a lot of developers would really like IE and every other browser to follow the W3C recommendations.

It is possible to create much more appealing and engaging sites using the W3C recommendations than those of IE. One of the best example I can think of is CSS popup menus. When properly created they take less code than scripting, can be changed on the fly, and are compatible with text browsers. IE doesn't support this in anyway. This is just one example of how the W3C's recommendations are far better than Microsofts.

Simply put 10% of the internet using population is still a very large group of people. Although I have not facts or figures to back up this statement, I believe the majority of developers and browser companies have spoken. I believe they have chosen the W3C recommendations to be the standard language for website creation.

I would like anybody who want to to visit this page using IE and Firefox and tell me what they think.
http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/css/edge/complexspiral/demo.html

[tsm26]

CSS popup menus in IE

Well, CSS popups and other things like changing a background color on a hover without it being a link can be done in IE, but it often takes a lot of nasty javascript code. Sometimes the code gets so crazy I just don't follow it at all. This is definitely a bad thing, but it can be done. For an example go here http://www.phpguru.org/static/dyncalendar.html. Cool free calendar code by the way.

[Jan Modaal]

It has to go both ways

A lot of the whining is also incredibly hypocritical.

People don't care about standards, only web designers do. Those same web designers won't charge a penny less the day all browsers magically render all pages the same way. They'll just count their blessings and pocket the extra cash since they now have to perform less work for the same result.

At the same time those who rant endlessly about standards and glorify FireFox as a beacon of light on standards compliance cheer Mozilla on, touting how "innovative" it is, as it starts adding Mozilla-only extensions, something that when Microsoft does it gets announces as a mortal sin.

It's also ridiculous that after all these years where IE was at a virtual standstill that there are still things you can do with IE that no other browser out there will support.
I have pages that render as they should in IE, but render in a *non-standard* fashion on FireFox due to CSS bugs they still haven't gotten around to fixing.
Moral of the story: no browser is perfect, and there will never be a time where you can design one page and won't have to hack around to make it work in a broken browser.

The fact that IE hasn't been updated for ages should be considered a blessing. If Microsoft decides to regularly update IE again, we'll be back where we were all those years ago where one single page had to not only support three browsers, but 3-4 different versions of each browser, each with their own little quirks.
As broken as IE might be, it's been a relative constant where everything before IE 6 can now be considered obsolete, making every designer's job a LOT easier compared to when they had to support IE 4, 5, 5.5 and 6 all at the same time.

I'll put good money betting that a year from now the debate won't be about standards compliance but how agonizing it is to have to deal with all the different browser versions out there.

[Jan Modaal]

It has to go both ways

A lot of the whining is also incredibly hypocritical.

People don't care about standards, only web designers do. Those same web designers won't charge a penny less the day all browsers magically render all pages the same way. They'll just count their blessings and pocket the extra cash since they now have to perform less work for the same result.

At the same time those who rant endlessly about standards and glorify FireFox as a beacon of light on standards compliance cheer Mozilla on, touting how "innovative" it is, as it starts adding Mozilla-only extensions, something that when Microsoft does it gets announces as a mortal sin.

It's also ridiculous that after all these years where IE was at a virtual standstill that there are still things you can do with IE that no other browser out there will support.
I have pages that render as they should in IE, but render in a *non-standard* fashion on FireFox due to CSS bugs they still haven't gotten around to fixing.
Moral of the story: no browser is perfect, and there will never be a time where you can design one page and won't have to hack around to make it work in a broken browser.

The fact that IE hasn't been updated for ages should be considered a blessing. If Microsoft decides to regularly update IE again, we'll be back where we were all those years ago where one single page had to not only support three browsers, but 3-4 different versions of each browser, each with their own little quirks.
As broken as IE might be, it's been a relative constant where everything before IE 6 can now be considered obsolete, making every designer's job a LOT easier compared to when they had to support IE 4, 5, 5.5 and 6 all at the same time.

I'll put good money betting that a year from now the debate won't be about standards compliance but how agonizing it is to have to deal with all the different browser versions out there.

[202578300049013666264380294439]

Look at past behavior, it is all a farse! LookOut!

Sure, whatever. M$ says "we'll behave", then twists the knife in your back. History shows this is always the case, expect nothing else from M$.

[202578300049013666264380294439]

Look at past behavior, it is all a farse! LookOut!

Sure, whatever. M$ says "we'll behave", then twists the knife in your back. History shows this is always the case, expect nothing else from M$.