March 17, 2008

Flame wars

Man, you thought Amiga-versus-ST-versus-Mac-versus-PC was vicious (if you're an old-timer)?

This one looks to be a real doozy: Microsoft currently wants to make IE8 strict about interpreting HTML according to specs, and the initial beta which is out now doesn't display the majority of web pages right.

Joel is always fun to read. But it's worth reading this one anyway, because it'll explain to you why Minx doesn't work fully with Safari, and why it probably won't ever work fully with Safari.

And maybe not even with IE8. God help us (or at least me) if Microsoft makes IE8 a mandatory part of one of the Vista SP's...

Posted by: Steven Den Beste in linky at 09:45 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 110 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Ah, browser compatibility. Excuse me while I throw up.


Better. When I was writing the layout engine for Minx 1.1, I tested it carefully in IE 7, Firefox 2, Opera 9, and Safari whatever. I could make it work close enough to correctly in all of them, but only if I detected the browser in use and changed the doctype declaration accordingly. Eventually I found the dynamic CSS bug that was causing the problems and managed to get something that worked correctly on all major browsers.

I hate CSS. Hate it. It's fine for styling, but styling is a trivial issue anyway. For layout it's a complete train wreck. HTML 5 can't arrive soon enough.

Meanwhile, I'm implementing a new editor that also works across all major browsers. Unfortunately, it requires a PHP back end (for no good reason; the designers just didn't think very hard about what they were doing), so I have to hack that into working alongside Minx, which wants nothing whatever to do with PHP.

The fun, it never ends.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at March 18, 2008 01:47 AM (PiXy!)

2 Ah, so *thats* why the user interface in Office 2007 completely changed for not one single good reason.  Always wondered about that.

And it sounds to me like that particular branch of Microsoft is busy ensuring that Firefox gets an even bigger market share. . .

Posted by: metaphysician at March 18, 2008 05:59 AM (9Lztf)

3 I am waaaay over on the PRO side when it comes to web standards. Anything that brings IE and Firefox closer in their implementation of CSS would be awesome. The major problem is, Microsoft can give all the lip service to standards that they want. It doesn't mean that they'll actually follow through. The great thing is, if you've been designing and building sites properly (not using hacks and exploiting rendering errors) then your sites will still look great! May IE 6 die a horrible and painful death (but make it quick, I can't wait 'til it's gone)!

Posted by: madmike at March 18, 2008 10:16 AM (o+iiH)

4 Agreed 100%, madmike.  IE7 has its quirks (too many!), but it's possible to deal with it.  IE6 is a pile of crap.  Minx 1.1+ sites may not render properly in IE6, but I gave up caring.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at March 18, 2008 05:07 PM (PiXy!)

5 IE7 may well be technically superior, but I could have done without the "like-Firefox-only-not" interface.  They *really* need to learn that changing interface elements for no good reason is a bad thing. . .

( I'm 25 and already getting crotchety, that has to be a new record. . . )

Posted by: metaphysician at March 19, 2008 04:37 AM (9Lztf)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Enclose all spoilers in spoiler tags:
      [spoiler]your spoiler here[/spoiler]
Spoilers which are not properly tagged will be ruthlessly deleted on sight.
Also, I hate unsolicited suggestions and advice. (Even when you think you're being funny.)

At Chizumatic, we take pride in being incomplete, incorrect, inconsistent, and unfair. We do all of them deliberately.

How to put links in your comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
8kb generated in CPU 0.01, elapsed 0.0362 seconds.
28 queries taking 0.0257 seconds, 22 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.