<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: IE 8 on Acid</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ajaxian.com/archives/ie-8-on-acid/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/ie-8-on-acid</link>
	<description>Cleaning up the web with Ajax</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 06:55:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: ozonecreations</title>
		<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/ie-8-on-acid/comment-page-1#comment-261915</link>
		<dc:creator>ozonecreations</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2008 05:46:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ajaxian.com/archives/ie-8-on-acid#comment-261915</guid>
		<description>I see all of these posts on the hype of IE8, many of the improvements are great (it&#039;s about time they actually attempted to pass the acid test instead of just claiming they were compliant).  Many of the JS improvements are good.  Would be nice to see some answers on some of the fundamental questions/issues that cause so much development headache if anybody out there can get MS to open up.

Are they going to at least alias the opacity filter to actually support the real opacity standard?  How many other MS-CSS filter properties mirror actual CSS standards properties?  

Are we going to see exposure Element and Node (and their associated prototypes) and all of the other DOM abstracts that are needed for high end development?  Need I  mention the performance and memory improvements you gain by not having to manually extend every element in the DOM?

Are they actually going to treat XHTML (and preferably HTML also) as an XML based language so that XPath and inserting XML nodes etc actually works?

Will we see any of the newer JS standard functions (Array.forEach etc)?

Why is it that every JS library developer can manage to get full CSS3 selector support, yet MS cannot? Why waste everyones time with the selectorQuery function and then do it halfway?  

Is getElementsByTagName(&#039;*&#039;) going to continue to return a text node (DOCTYPE?!?!?!) as the first item?

Are they going to fix arrays so that numbered arrays that have a named property added don&#039;t return a type of string when for the key when a numbered element is accessed?

Are they finally going to get rid of all of the peek-a-boo bugs (yes they still happen in 7)?
  
Events!?!?!? go figure

It is fantastic that they are going to have support for more standards (MathML, SVG etc).  Why don&#039;t they get the basics fixed before they try to jump the gun on emerging standards and screw those up also? Or is this another attempt to subvert emerging standards to MS incompatible standard before the real standards can solidify?

Sorry, for the rant all, this is in no way trying to shoot the messenger.  Great job in letting the world know what is going in with IE8.  Hopefully, MS&#039;s new &quot;transparency&quot; will allow people to get answers on whether IE8 will actually be a fix to their existing shortfalls or just a broken implementation of new and old standards.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I see all of these posts on the hype of IE8, many of the improvements are great (it&#8217;s about time they actually attempted to pass the acid test instead of just claiming they were compliant).  Many of the JS improvements are good.  Would be nice to see some answers on some of the fundamental questions/issues that cause so much development headache if anybody out there can get MS to open up.</p>
<p>Are they going to at least alias the opacity filter to actually support the real opacity standard?  How many other MS-CSS filter properties mirror actual CSS standards properties?  </p>
<p>Are we going to see exposure Element and Node (and their associated prototypes) and all of the other DOM abstracts that are needed for high end development?  Need I  mention the performance and memory improvements you gain by not having to manually extend every element in the DOM?</p>
<p>Are they actually going to treat XHTML (and preferably HTML also) as an XML based language so that XPath and inserting XML nodes etc actually works?</p>
<p>Will we see any of the newer JS standard functions (Array.forEach etc)?</p>
<p>Why is it that every JS library developer can manage to get full CSS3 selector support, yet MS cannot? Why waste everyones time with the selectorQuery function and then do it halfway?  </p>
<p>Is getElementsByTagName(&#8216;*&#8217;) going to continue to return a text node (DOCTYPE?!?!?!) as the first item?</p>
<p>Are they going to fix arrays so that numbered arrays that have a named property added don&#8217;t return a type of string when for the key when a numbered element is accessed?</p>
<p>Are they finally going to get rid of all of the peek-a-boo bugs (yes they still happen in 7)?</p>
<p>Events!?!?!? go figure</p>
<p>It is fantastic that they are going to have support for more standards (MathML, SVG etc).  Why don&#8217;t they get the basics fixed before they try to jump the gun on emerging standards and screw those up also? Or is this another attempt to subvert emerging standards to MS incompatible standard before the real standards can solidify?</p>
<p>Sorry, for the rant all, this is in no way trying to shoot the messenger.  Great job in letting the world know what is going in with IE8.  Hopefully, MS&#8217;s new &#8220;transparency&#8221; will allow people to get answers on whether IE8 will actually be a fix to their existing shortfalls or just a broken implementation of new and old standards.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JeromeLapointe</title>
		<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/ie-8-on-acid/comment-page-1#comment-261898</link>
		<dc:creator>JeromeLapointe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 16:08:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ajaxian.com/archives/ie-8-on-acid#comment-261898</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t know... just tried my site on it and I see sort weird stuff that FF3 and Safari3 didnt do...

Plus it does not apply styles to xhtml I dynamically added in my page using prototype&#039;s &quot;Insertion.Bottom()&quot; (aventried After(), Top() or Before()...). Maybe it&#039;s just that Prototype needs to be updated for IE8... I dunno...

I guess the Acid test is not the end-all of tests when it comes to making sure you are CSS 2.1 compliant... and right now I very much doubt that IE8 actually is ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t know&#8230; just tried my site on it and I see sort weird stuff that FF3 and Safari3 didnt do&#8230;</p>
<p>Plus it does not apply styles to xhtml I dynamically added in my page using prototype&#8217;s &#8220;Insertion.Bottom()&#8221; (aventried After(), Top() or Before()&#8230;). Maybe it&#8217;s just that Prototype needs to be updated for IE8&#8230; I dunno&#8230;</p>
<p>I guess the Acid test is not the end-all of tests when it comes to making sure you are CSS 2.1 compliant&#8230; and right now I very much doubt that IE8 actually is &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carbon43</title>
		<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/ie-8-on-acid/comment-page-1#comment-261893</link>
		<dc:creator>Carbon43</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 14:59:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ajaxian.com/archives/ie-8-on-acid#comment-261893</guid>
		<description>Thats a reasonable explanation. I have to say, I&#039;m impressed that they are even commenting on it.

I thought what they meant was &quot;We passed it&quot;, &quot;Now we no longer have to worry about it&quot;.... good to see the continued push towards REAL OPEN standards Microsoft. Keep it up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thats a reasonable explanation. I have to say, I&#8217;m impressed that they are even commenting on it.</p>
<p>I thought what they meant was &#8220;We passed it&#8221;, &#8220;Now we no longer have to worry about it&#8221;&#8230;. good to see the continued push towards REAL OPEN standards Microsoft. Keep it up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

