- From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@iinet.net.au>
- Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 18:57:47 +1000
Jim Ley wrote: >>What exactly has been fixed? > > the error in the DTD that you were reporting. I'm sure it has, but not according to IE. >>What? The fact that it doesn't support HTML or XHTML at all > > You're claiming IE doesn't support HTML now? No, it doesn't fully support it. Though, technically, Mozilla and Opera don't fully support HTML either (see these tests [1]), but IE is far worse. It doesn't fully support <abbr>, <object>, <link/>, and probably several more elements and attributes. > Do you mean: http://www.lachy.id.au/ ? in which case, I seem to get > HTML 4.01 documents... Yes, I put in some effort to set up content negotiation when I set it up, so I knew you would get HTML 4.01, but my point was that IE can't render documents well at all. However, I have had a report that someone who tried to use IE recieved a 406 response... I don't know what caused it, but IE must be more broken than I thought if it can even get the Accept header correct sometimes. > and the rendering is better than the firefox > rendering, which seems really slow... not surprising as it waits for > ages before starting to render it... LOL! Now, that's just being arrogant. It's quite obvious that the document is a complete mess in IE, though it's not as bad as it was ? I included a single hack to make it at least readable. There's not much else I can say, except congratulations, you've recieved an award ? [2]. [1] http://www.lachy.id.au/dev/markup/tests/html401/shorttag/net/ (Note: Mozilla does not correctly view the source as it's written in the files, so you'll have to save the file and view with text editor or another browser) [2] http://www.lachy.id.au/blogs/nettwits/2004/08/is-ie-really-better (Note: IE doesn't even display the image, or the alternate content for it, so you'll have to fire up a browser that works) -- Lachlan Hunt http://www.lachy.id.au/ lachlan.hunt at lachy.id.au
Received on Friday, 20 August 2004 01:57:47 UTC