SubscribeBecause Acid2 is not a comprehensive test, it does not guarantee total conformance with any particular standard.Many have said that the importance of the test is overblown. It's possible for a browser to pass the test but have serious rendering issues with popular websites, and it's possible for a browser to fail the test but work well in the real world anyway.
Ooooh... data URLs. Why in gods name has no one supported that yet?Actually, the data URI scheme is currently supported by Gecko (Firefox, Camino, etc.), WebKit (Safari), KDE (Konqueror), and Presto (Opera). Last I checked, that's every major rendering engine except for IE.
I remember when Opera 7 had to implement the Doctype switch. We did that because it became clear that this switch, as implemented in other browsers inclduign IE 6, would mean we would continue to get bug reports on our perfectly spec-compatible handling of the box model and CSS error handling, because existing content would never get fixed and would continue to ‘work’. It wouldn’t be so bad if we could just say, well, this old website looks a bit weird, but that happens in all modern browsers - instead, people expect other browsers to ‘just’ handle the web the same way as the number one browsers does, as if what that browser do can easily be emulated.So he's explicitly upset that Microsoft doesn't ditch backwards compatibility so that Opera can stick to standards and point out that there's no browser out there that renders what used to render. Come on folks. That's just a non-starter. Let's not say "Microsoft is evil" because they don't support your agenda.
data: URIs last weekend, and you know what? It felt good. Having access to more than a minute subset of the available CSS selectors is nice. Being able to use CSS3 properties is nice. SVG is really cool. I am fucking tired of making crippled websites (and spending half the time making even these crippled sites work with IE) because Microsoft cannot be bothered to act in good faith.* html hacks and dubious Javascript compatibility libraries and fighting its different box model have taken more hours of my life than I care to think about, and it makes me so very angry to know that Microsoft is doing this on purpose.data: URIs to generate PNG text headings inline on-the-fly from strings known only at runtime, which is pretty evil semantically and accessibility-wise but is a way to work around that other browser's infuriating refusal to implement downloadable fonts as specified in CSS2 in fucking 1998. Which IE supports, kind of. You can't win for losing in this racket..ralign { text-align: ralign; }
.red { color: #ff0000; }
...etcNow, whenever I want something red and align-right, I can just do class="red ralign". But what usually happens is someone creates a rule that's so specific to a particular element that they have to keep re-writing the same CSS rule over and over again.What I usually see with bad CSS is where nearly every single element gets its own styling rule. It's much simpler to combine rules like so:You're complaining about "bad" CSS, yet you have a CSS rule for "red"?
.ralign { text-align: ralign; }
.red { color: #ff0000; }
« Older Art Images for College Teaching... | Cutlery pen caps l Top 10 Pick... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by bonaldi at 11:47 AM on February 1, 2008