[Wsuug] Of Browsers and Compatibility

[Zach Young]

There's never good enough :) I wish I could talk to my toaster. And
that it had arms to put the bread in itself. And that it could learn
what the perfect amount of toastiness was. That would be awesome.

On Jan 31, 2008 6:13 PM, Jason Wilson <jason at jasonwilsondesign.com> wrote:
> You got me there, I guess. Perhaps it's just my personality, I like
> it when things reach 'good enough' status. 'Good enough' defends us
> from the singularity, the time when our toasters will become sentient
> and take over.
>
>
>
> On 31 Jan 2008, at 18:06, Zach Young wrote:
>
> > There's tons to still improve. The speed of rendering, rendering pages
> > with small errors correctly, and accommodating new standards (one lone
> > engine might take longer to bring up to new standards without
> > competition - look at IE6. There wasn't really a drive to fix it until
> > FF started taking off.) There's probably a lot more, but that's all I
> > could think up in a few minutes. In the compilation business (which is
> > essentially what rendering is) there's always room to improve, even if
> > your compiler is 100% to standards.
> >
> > Just thoughts.
> >
> > Zach
> >
> > On Jan 31, 2008 6:04 PM, Jason Wilson <jason at jasonwilsondesign.com>
> > wrote:
> >> True, Zach, but once the engine is supporting standards at 100% what
> >> is there to improve? The rest of the browser is where competition
> >> should occur.
> >>
> >> I can see Chris' point though, and I know a sole engine would never
> >> happen. I did also miss on the bit about past sites, I knew that was
> >> part of the problem but it seemed like both of their solutions were
> >> ways forward that wouldn't necessarily help the sites that are stuck
> >> in the past.
> >>
> >> On 31 Jan 2008, at 17:56, Zach Young wrote:
> >>
> >>> I like the fact that there are several different engines that
> >>> conform
> >>> to standards. If there were only one engine, there wouldn't be the
> >>> same competition to improve, create new standards, etc.
> >>> Competition is
> >>> a good thing. It's better when all the competition follows the same
> >>> standards.
> >>>
> >>> On Jan 31, 2008 5:14 PM, Christopher Jones <chrismjones at gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>  From a pactical business stance, there is no way MS and Mozilla
> >>>> and Opera
> >>>> and Webkit will ever use the same engine, though I do believe we
> >>>> are quickly
> >>>> coming to a time where they will all be compliant enough with the
> >>>> standards
> >>>> that if you want to create strictly by the standards without
> >>>> proprietary
> >>>> code, you will be able to. To me, that is close enough to the same
> >>>> thing as
> >>>> it covers the practical needs of our profession. But that is
> >>>> looking to the
> >>>> future of web development.
> >>>>
> >>>> The idea put forth in the alistapart article is not about the
> >>>> future, but
> >>>> about the past. The question is not so much, "what do we do with
> >>>> new
> >>>> websites?", but "what do we do with old websites?" A standards
> >>>> based engine
> >>>> will break any site created specifically for a non-standards based
> >>>> engine.
> >>>> Breaking the web is a non-starter for any company serious about
> >>>> staying in
> >>>> business. MS is trying to preserve a past which was built with a
> >>>> foundation
> >>>> of sand while still allowing new constructions to be built
> >>>> properly.
> >>>>
> >>>> ~ Christopher
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 1/31/08, Jason Wilson <jason at jasonwilsondesign.com> wrote:
> >>>>> Hello all,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> After reading through the latest issue of A List Apart (http://
> >>>>> www.alistapart.com/articles/) I was left bashing my head
> >>>>> against the
> >>>>> wall. The articles give two different proposed solutions for an
> >>>>> issue
> >>>>> I feel we will face more and more in the coming years.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What happens to old content, bad content etc. as the web moves
> >>>>> forwards down standards lane (that's my oversimplified view of
> >>>>> what
> >>>>> the question)?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'll let you read the articles before discussing my proposed
> >>>>> solution… … …
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Done? Good. It seems most of the problem is dealing with how the
> >>>>> browsers render engine recognises content. To me the simplest
> >>>>> answer
> >>>>> is, if you want standard rendering, you need a standard rendering
> >>>>> engine!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Your first thought may be, wouldn't that remove competition? Maybe
> >>>>> years ago but today very few of us who choose browsers choose them
> >>>>> based on the rendering engine involved. If Firefox and Internet
> >>>>> Explorer were using the same rendering engine they would still be
> >>>>> two
> >>>>> separate products with their own attractive features. Just like a
> >>>>> Honda car and a Ford car are still separate cars if they use the
> >>>>> same
> >>>>> tires. The problem we're having is that proprietary browsers are
> >>>>> using proprietary tires designed to drive on a different
> >>>>> interpretation of what a road is. It's madness in my opinion.
> >>>>> When I
> >>>>> go and design a road (website) I shouldn't have to consider
> >>>>> adapting
> >>>>> the road for each car builders ideal of a tire.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think there really should be a push for a standards based,
> >>>>> standard
> >>>>> issue, browser engine.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What do you all think?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jason _______________________________________________
> >>>>> Wsuug mailing list
> >>>>> Wsuug at list.wsuug.org
> >>>>> http://www.thelinuxlink.net/mailman/listinfo/wsuug
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Wsuug mailing list
> >>>> Wsuug at list.wsuug.org
> >>>> http://www.thelinuxlink.net/mailman/listinfo/wsuug
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Wsuug mailing list
> >>> Wsuug at list.wsuug.org
> >>> http://www.thelinuxlink.net/mailman/listinfo/wsuug
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Wsuug mailing list
> >> Wsuug at list.wsuug.org
> >> http://www.thelinuxlink.net/mailman/listinfo/wsuug
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wsuug mailing list
> > Wsuug at list.wsuug.org
> > http://www.thelinuxlink.net/mailman/listinfo/wsuug
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wsuug mailing list
> Wsuug at list.wsuug.org
> http://www.thelinuxlink.net/mailman/listinfo/wsuug
>