Comments on: Standards: An alternate take http://mikemcquaid.com/2008/03/standards-an-alternate-take/ the internet is leaking Mon, 25 Jan 2010 09:52:49 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Mike Arthur http://mikemcquaid.com/2008/03/standards-an-alternate-take/comment-page-1/#comment-322 Mike Arthur Wed, 19 Mar 2008 00:44:15 +0000 http://mikearthur.co.uk/2008/03/18/standards-an-alternate-take/#comment-322 @mutlu: What new stuff does IE8 introduce that isn't standard improvement based? I'm not saying you are wrong I just haven't seen any evidence of that. The whole point is that they are now trying to work with the rest of the software world at the cost of their own profits but yet people still criticise them! I think you fell prey to your emotions which have misled your evaluation of a software engineering decision. @Leo: I agree that the team did dig their whole, I just lament when I see software engineers trying to fix a problem in a sensible way but being screwed by previous mistakes. @Viktor: How is passing ACID2 sabotaging standards? Sabotaging SVG would be extending it with proprietary extensions, instead they are just not implementing it. I think that is a bit lame but you can't say that they are sabotaging standards by implementing them! @John Tapsell: I don't know what you refer to by "system". If you mean will it improve IE as a product, I'm not sure either way. I find it a bit of a shame when people can't discuss a software engineering problem without becoming overly emotional about it. Leo, I'm glad at least someone seemed to enjoy the blog post and at least you seem to have actually read it! My discussion was aiming to be about the software engineering teams decision as, as a software engineer, this interests me far more than MS's politics or past actions. @mutlu: What new stuff does IE8 introduce that isn’t standard improvement based? I’m not saying you are wrong I just haven’t seen any evidence of that. The whole point is that they are now trying to work with the rest of the software world at the cost of their own profits but yet people still criticise them! I think you fell prey to your emotions which have misled your evaluation of a software engineering decision.

@Leo: I agree that the team did dig their whole, I just lament when I see software engineers trying to fix a problem in a sensible way but being screwed by previous mistakes.

@Viktor: How is passing ACID2 sabotaging standards? Sabotaging SVG would be extending it with proprietary extensions, instead they are just not implementing it. I think that is a bit lame but you can’t say that they are sabotaging standards by implementing them!

@John Tapsell: I don’t know what you refer to by “system”. If you mean will it improve IE as a product, I’m not sure either way.

I find it a bit of a shame when people can’t discuss a software engineering problem without becoming overly emotional about it. Leo, I’m glad at least someone seemed to enjoy the blog post and at least you seem to have actually read it! My discussion was aiming to be about the software engineering teams decision as, as a software engineer, this interests me far more than MS’s politics or past actions.

]]> By: John Tapsell http://mikemcquaid.com/2008/03/standards-an-alternate-take/comment-page-1/#comment-321 John Tapsell Tue, 18 Mar 2008 10:34:29 +0000 http://mikearthur.co.uk/2008/03/18/standards-an-alternate-take/#comment-321 If IE8 does not follow the standards, by default, then do you think that will 1) Improve the current broken system 2) Make it worse. If IE8 does not follow the standards, by default, then do you think that will

1) Improve the current broken system
2) Make it worse.

]]> By: Viktor http://mikemcquaid.com/2008/03/standards-an-alternate-take/comment-page-1/#comment-320 Viktor Tue, 18 Mar 2008 09:25:32 +0000 http://mikearthur.co.uk/2008/03/18/standards-an-alternate-take/#comment-320 Yes, pragmatism is fine, but I find Joels blog post dishonest because he pretends that there are only two interests in play. When in fact there is a third interest which is Microsofts financial interest in sabotaging standards. The refusal to add SVG capability to IE8 is an example of this interest as far as I can see. Yes, pragmatism is fine, but I find Joels blog post dishonest because he pretends that there are only two interests in play. When in fact there is a third interest which is Microsofts financial interest in sabotaging standards.
The refusal to add SVG capability to IE8 is an example of this interest as far as I can see.

]]> By: Leo S http://mikemcquaid.com/2008/03/standards-an-alternate-take/comment-page-1/#comment-319 Leo S Tue, 18 Mar 2008 03:36:59 +0000 http://mikearthur.co.uk/2008/03/18/standards-an-alternate-take/#comment-319 That said I also think the only sane thing to do is to default to quirks mode. That said I also think the only sane thing to do is to default to quirks mode.

]]> By: Leo S http://mikemcquaid.com/2008/03/standards-an-alternate-take/comment-page-1/#comment-317 Leo S Tue, 18 Mar 2008 03:36:28 +0000 http://mikearthur.co.uk/2008/03/18/standards-an-alternate-take/#comment-317 I thought it was an excellent blog post. The only complaint being that he describes web standards as some impossibly complex thing that can't ever be correctly implemented. Well that is pretty much proven wrong by the fact that Opera/Firefox/Webkit all have reasonably compatible implementations of the standard and only IE gets it completely backwards. Sure it's complicated, but its not an impossible task. The IE team dug their own hole. I'm not particularly sad to see them wallow in it now. I thought it was an excellent blog post. The only complaint being that he describes web standards as some impossibly complex thing that can’t ever be correctly implemented. Well that is pretty much proven wrong by the fact that Opera/Firefox/Webkit all have reasonably compatible implementations of the standard and only IE gets it completely backwards. Sure it’s complicated, but its not an impossible task. The IE team dug their own hole. I’m not particularly sad to see them wallow in it now.

]]> By: mutlu http://mikemcquaid.com/2008/03/standards-an-alternate-take/comment-page-1/#comment-318 mutlu Tue, 18 Mar 2008 02:57:27 +0000 http://mikearthur.co.uk/2008/03/18/standards-an-alternate-take/#comment-318 It is a well-established 'tradition' for Microsoft to incrementally introduce new APIs and to support all kinds of legacy stuff, bloating the system (without actually fully achieving its aims). Why should it be different in this case? IE8 introduces lots of new stuff, is somewhat backwards compatible while still breaking many things that used to work. The question is not whether they suddenly abandon their old algorithms and thus 'betray' users and developers counting on that they work, but what direction the changes take. An utter unwillingness to work with the rest of the software world for the sake of its own profits cannot be explained away with posing an all-or-nothing alternative. I think you fell prey to a simple logical fallacy. It is a well-established ‘tradition’ for Microsoft to incrementally introduce new APIs and to support all kinds of legacy stuff, bloating the system (without actually fully achieving its aims). Why should it be different in this case? IE8 introduces lots of new stuff, is somewhat backwards compatible while still breaking many things that used to work. The question is not whether they suddenly abandon their old algorithms and thus ‘betray’ users and developers counting on that they work, but what direction the changes take. An utter unwillingness to work with the rest of the software world for the sake of its own profits cannot be explained away with posing an all-or-nothing alternative. I think you fell prey to a simple logical fallacy.

]]>