Lowter - New Comments

I'm perfectly happy with XHTML2 being dropped beca…

Frans — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 04:19:59 -0400

I'm perfectly happy with XHTML2 being dropped because anything that was good about it has been transfered into the HTML5 spec anyway.

I admit that I don't know much about XHTML 2, but I do know that you can't do namespaces and all those nice XHTML things that result in XHTML+MathML & XHTML+SVG, XHTML+MathML+SVG etc etc. In HTML it has to be explicitly added to the HTML specification and due to HTML5 not being XML, doesn't quite work with proper SVG either.

HTML 5 also allows the poorly written syntax. Sure you can write good code, but why not force people to write stricter code?

Since HTML5 defines error handling, I think that should result far less in the well-known IE guessing at what someone meant to do problem?

I disagree about the strictness. Forcing strictness is always better for code. One of PHP's greatest weaknesses is that you can easily write crappy PHP code, just as easily as you can write good code. Languages like Python and Ruby address these problems and enforce a very specific syntax.

With PHP I could start out with relatively crappy code and as I learned, I started to write better code. I'm sure that applies to many people. Perhaps poorly written PHP and Javascript code makes some better programmers who are more familiar with languages like Java sniff at it, but in the end most of the really bad things you can do in PHP have to be explicitly enabled anyway and will probably be disabled in most modern PHP installations. In the end, you can still very easily write crappy program logic in any programming language.

I disagree about the strictness. Forcing strictne…

Ethan Poole — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 13:45:13 -0400

I disagree about the strictness. Forcing strictness is always better for code. One of PHP's greatest weaknesses is that you can easily write crappy PHP code, just as easily as you can write good code. Languages like Python and Ruby address these problems and enforce a very specific syntax.

I don't see why HTML 5 has to be non-XML? What is the benefit of leaving off end tags and not being well-formed?

XHTML 2 didn't gain adoption because it was too big of a change and it didn't offer any backwards compatibility. However, it died because Apple and Google (others too I'm sure) have turned HTML 5 into a marketing buzz word. A lot of the cool HTML 5 things Apple and Google have hyped, like <audio> and <video> and <canvas>, were also available in the XHTML 2 spec.

The problem is that people don't want to be forced…

Matt Oakes — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 13:16:37 -0400

The problem is that people don't want to be forced. If they are foced to do soemthing they don't want to they are likely to just not bother with it at all and hence stich with HTML4. Which is bad for the web.

There is no point writing a spec if no one wants to follow it. In the end that's the reason why XHTML2 didn't gain adoption, it turned out it wasn't what most people wanted.

My issue with HTML 5 is that it adds too many tags…

Ethan Poole — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 20:49:41 -0400

My issue with HTML 5 is that it adds too many tags that XHTML 2 solved with the role attribute. HTML 5 also allows the poorly written syntax. Sure you can write good code, but why not force people to write stricter code? A stricter web is always better, in my opinion.

I'm perfectly happy with XHTML2 being dropped beca…

Matt Oakes — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 16:24:09 -0400

I'm perfectly happy with XHTML2 being dropped because anything that was good about it has been transfered into the HTML5 spec anyway. The thing I liked about XHTML was the slightly stricter syntax which just made me code a little bit nicer, this is allowed. The generic header tag <h> is also in there and a few other bits and bobs.

I think the main reason why XHTML2 didn't get adopted was that it wasn't trying to solve problems that we face at the minute. It was just sort of missing the point with what people wanted and how people are using (X)HTML at the minute.

Untill HTML5 comes out I'll still be using XHTML1.1, and even after it does I'll still be using the XHTML syntax because it's what I've got used to.

To me it's no big thing as XHTML2 wasn't anything special anyway. It also makes it easier that everyone has only one set of standards to work towards.

I've been using the Opera 10 weeklies for my daily…

Frans — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 14:02:54 -0400

I've been using the Opera 10 weeklies for my daily browsing for quite a while now.

I love how you can also use things like SVG fonts in addition to the more regular font formats.

Looks interesting. I've been looking around for st…

Matt Oakes — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 05:08:17 -0400

Looks interesting. I've been looking around for stuff like that near me and the best one I can find is Future of Web Design which is in London. No way I can afford that one yet though

http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/MSIE7Bug…

Frans — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 20:57:09 -0400

http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/MSIE7Bugs/VerticalAlignSubBug.html (external link)

And this one (from the same source as the quote) also shows an IE8 bug quite nicely. IE8 may claim support for more properties or something, although buggy support should NOT count as support at all imo.

Also there is something that both Webkit and IE8 do on my weblog, which if you ask me is buggy, but I'll have to look into creating a minimized testcase for that. Or I could be wrong which would make Opera and Firefox buggy on that one...

Anyway, I haven't really followed IE8's release, but if Microsoft is claiming that they fully support CSS2.1 then that's the same kind of nonsense as Apple's claimed support for ARIA in Safari.

http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/css/fonts/weight/0…

Frans — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 20:49:24 -0400

http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/css/fonts/weight/002.html (external link)

Watch IE8 fail. Here's some more:

Quotation by "http://www.webdevout.net/tidings/2009/03/23/ie-8-css-21-support-results/#comment-4158"
Regarding IE 8 support for CSS 2.1 in your conformance results page

1- Incorrect parsing and rendering of font-size when involving system font in IE 8:
Testcase and bug report accessible from
http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/MSIE8Bugs/#bug134 (external link)

2- Font-family must not contain unescaped parenthesis:
Testcase and bug report accessible from
http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/MSIE8Bugs/#bug141 (external link)

3- Font shorthand and inherit keyword are incorrectly parsed in IE 8
Testcase and bug report accessible from
http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/MSIE8Bugs/#bug133 (external link)

4- Media-dependent @import rules fail in IE 8
Testcase and bug report accessible from
http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/MSIE8Bugs/#bug77 (external link)

5- Various other import techniques fail in IE 8
Testcase:
http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/css/cascade/import/002.html (external link)

6- border-width: inherit test which fails in IE 8:
http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/css/border/width/001.html (external link)

and Iâ��m sure there are others.

regards, GÃ©rard

As you can see there are plenty of annoying bugs left, also related to some fairly basic DOM and HTML related behavior. It's a giant leap forward, but frankly I've been using something better for years.

I don't think IE8 is the only browser to support C…

Ethan Poole — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 18:14:45 -0400

I don't think IE8 is the only browser to support CSS 2.1. I'm looking here at Opera's web specifications (external link) and I'm not seeing anything they don't support, but perhaps it isn't as specific as a property or something.

I think they only reason they are touting that is because they made an extensive testing library, which they submitted to the WC. However, I've read a number of places about how IE8 still has a number of CSS 2.1 bugs (http://dev.moonhenge.net/bugs/ie8/css/ for a few). But don't get me wrong, they have done tons of great stuff, they're just stretching the truth a bit in my opinion.

Also, most of the people's compliancy isuses nowadays seem to be directed towards JavaScript, which MS have not resolved yet.

I can't see them dropping IE in favour of FireFox …

Matt Oakes — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 19:56:43 -0400

I can't see them dropping IE in favour of FireFox or Opera. They will likely do a rewrite of rendering engine but I don't see them using a pre-existing browser or rendering engine (like Webkit). They are most likely already working on the next rendering engine.

Just one think you missed out. IE8 is the only browser to fully support CSS 2.1. All other browsers only implement some of the bits of CSS 2.1, IE8 implements them all. This makes it the most standard compliant browser when you look at CSS 2.1 level. The reason why they do so poorly on the Acid3 test is that CSS3 is the goal of the next version of IE. This has always been something that Microsoft have been aiming for; full CSS 2.1 in IE8 and full CSS3 in future browsers. IE8 also has quite a bit of HTML5 implemented as well; although I'm not sure how much, or what, they have implemented compared to other browsers.

Overall I really like IE8. I've used it a bit and it's a ver capable browser and renders most things perfectly.

I just don't think its fair to compare the iPhone …

Ethan Poole — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:58:26 -0400

I just don't think its fair to compare the iPhone to anything other than another smartphone, which have about the same battery life. The Sony Ericsson s500i simply doesn't do as much as the iPhone.

I didn't realise it was that bad :S I thought my p…

Matt Oakes — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 15:33:24 -0400

I didn't realise it was that bad I thought my phone was bad but at least it lasts about 4-5 days depending on how I use it. I'm normally on Opera Mini a lot and always have 3G and HSPA turned on.

I don't think it is that the iPhone couldn't handl…

Ethan Poole — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 09:31:31 -0400

I don't think it is that the iPhone couldn't handle multitasking, it would just be a huge battery drain. The 3G and the huge screen already do enough. I don't think you realise, but the iPhone's battery usually only last me a day and I have the first-gen with better battery life. Adding anything else draining would just put it over the top.

My Sony Ericsson s500i multitasks just fine. A reg…

Frans — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 15:58:36 -0400

My Sony Ericsson s500i multitasks just fine. A regular multitask is Opera Mini and Google Talk Mobile, perhaps combined with the built-in calendar or e-mail application. It does impact battery life, but barely more than just doing any of those individually.

I've got a Sony Ericsson C902. I can't find what s…

Matt Oakes — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 12:55:47 -0400

I've got a Sony Ericsson C902. I can't find what speed processor it is online, but I'll have a quick look at the documents that came with the phone to see if it says in there. I know the iPhone is around 600MHz thought and I guess my phone is around 450-500MHz. It's a much smaller phone so less space for a powerful cpu.

Not sure how having a more powerful CPU will make it less good at multitasking though...

What kind of phone do you have though? The iPhone…

Ethan Poole — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 09:39:25 -0400

What kind of phone do you have though? The iPhone is basically a mini-computer, so it isn't exactly a direct comparision to other phones. It has a more powerful processor and stuff. I think multitasking would become an issue with apps not being programmed correctly and someone having tons and tons of background processes they don't realise. It isn't something I really see a necessity for.

P2P Bluetooth in theory means you can send files and such. Not sure how that will pane out that.

I'd also like to see wireless syncing using Bluetooth between my Mac and my iPhone. At least for things like my calendar and contacts.

I rarely use the GUI config and if I do I tend to …

Frans — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 07:59:58 -0400

I rarely use the GUI config and if I do I tend to think opera:config is easier than bothering with the checkboxes. I've got an opera6.ini section that I simply copy over to every Opera install I make.

Looking good. I'm not sure if P2P Bluetooth means …

Matt Oakes — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 03:41:23 -0400

Looking good. I'm not sure if P2P Bluetooth means that you can send files to each other over bluetooth now, because that's something I do all the time, and couldnt bear to loose that.

I wouldnt get your hopes up for A2DP because if it's anything like the versions ive used before it will kill your battery life.

Also, why cant they do multitasking still? My phone can do it and it doesn't impact on the battery life that much. Obviously it doesnt help but it isnt the worst thing that can happen to it.

Seeing the level of customisation that Opera usual…

Ethan Poole — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 20:47:15 -0400

Seeing the level of customisation that Opera usually offers, I imagine they will have some aspects that the user can control. I would say they probably belong in opera:config though, rather than another preference box or something.

I'm on 2Mbit (allegedly, in practice more like 1.2…

Frans — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 21:11:16 -0400

I'm on 2Mbit (allegedly, in practice more like 1.2 to 1.5Mbit most of the time) and I notice a significant speed increase with Opera Turbo. For that reason I'm currently bearing with the low quality images, but I really wouldn't mind waiting for the original ones a little bit longer. There's one exception. The speed on Google Maps is phenomenal with the low quality images and it doesn't really affect it all that much.

The problem is that images are what makes up the m…

Matt Oakes — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 17:10:07 -0400

The problem is that images are what makes up the majority of the web traffic. If you dont compress them there isn't much point compressing anything. It is made for people with really slow connection speeds (sub 1mb/s) so I think that everything needs to be compressed. They could have a setting for how compressed the images are. This is possible because it is avaliable in Opera Mini already.

You mean the bottom left corner. :P Anyway, I'v…

Frans — Sun, 15 Mar 2009 21:58:15 -0400

You mean the bottom left corner.

Anyway, I've already posted my suggestions to the Opera forum/blog, namely:

-Ability to use the stop annoying stuff (plugins) functionality separately from Opera Turbo

-Compress text files only, load original images from original source (or higher quality compressed would work as well, I suppose... but that'd require more work for Opera servers)

If I've read the news right I think you need to ta…

Matt Oakes — Sun, 15 Mar 2009 04:53:45 -0400

If I've read the news right I think you need to take that up with Apple. I have to say that Opera Mini is one of the best bits of software about.

I like Opera extending this technology to the norm…

Ethan Poole — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 19:10:07 -0400

I like Opera extending this technology to the normal browser, especially because I think that it will come in handy for people around the world who have small Internet caps or their connection is very expensive. I still want Opera Mini for the iPhone though!

Lowter - New Comments

I'm perfectly happy with XHTML2 being dropped beca…

I disagree about the strictness. Forcing strictne…

The problem is that people don't want to be forced…

My issue with HTML 5 is that it adds too many tags…

I'm perfectly happy with XHTML2 being dropped beca…

I've been using the Opera 10 weeklies for my daily…

Looks interesting. I've been looking around for st…

http://www.gtalbot.org/BrowserBugsSection/MSIE7Bug…

http://www.hixie.ch/tests/adhoc/css/fonts/weight/0…

Quotation by "http://www.webdevout.net/tidings/2009/03/23/ie-8-css-21-support-results/#comment-4158"

I don't think IE8 is the only browser to support C…

I can't see them dropping IE in favour of FireFox …

I just don't think its fair to compare the iPhone …

I didn't realise it was that bad :S I thought my p…

I don't think it is that the iPhone couldn't handl…

My Sony Ericsson s500i multitasks just fine. A reg…

I've got a Sony Ericsson C902. I can't find what s…

What kind of phone do you have though? The iPhone…

I rarely use the GUI config and if I do I tend to …

Looking good. I'm not sure if P2P Bluetooth means …

Seeing the level of customisation that Opera usual…

I'm on 2Mbit (allegedly, in practice more like 1.2…

The problem is that images are what makes up the m…

You mean the bottom left corner. :P Anyway, I'v…

If I've read the news right I think you need to ta…

I like Opera extending this technology to the norm…