Bowie Bailey wrote:
LuKreme wrote:
On 11-Feb-2010, at 11:11, Charles Gregory wrote:
It's a rant page telling the visitor that you cannot read the site using
Internet Explorer,
Good. Get a real browser.
with major (large font) attitude that this is the fault of the browser.
It is, and this is explained clearly. IE does not support (I believe has never
supported and still does not support) Content-Type: application/xhtml+xml, and
does not, has not, and will probably never suport SVG images (though there were
no images on the original page).
Who would you like to blame for this if not Microsoft IE?
I would blame whoever set up the website. The page in question does not
even attempt to use the features that the "fail" page refers to. IE may
not be able to handle "xhtml+xml" or SVG images, but as long as it can
render the page in question, who cares? That redirect should be limited
to pages that actually use the features in question.
The redirect states "...9 year old standard required by the web
page..." so you obviously are blind, because the website developer
couldn't possibly be lying..... ;-)
I would refer the redirect author to the section
"The Myth of "HTML-compatible XHTML 1.0 documents"
in the following document http://hixie.ch/advocacy/xhtml
for an adult's understanding of why IE does not support it.
The solution is HTML5 support in IE, and once the HTML5 people
are finished wrangling amongst themselves, IE will support it.
That is why Microsoft joined the SVG working group of w3c last
month - because now with Adobe pulling their support of their
SVG IE plugin last year, it looks like we finally might have
some movement in that B.M. called HTML5.
The fact is the 4.01 standard is over a decade old. If the
HTML5 people had agreed on a set of standards 5 years ago
then we would have support for SVG and XHTML it in IE today.
The second fact is that if MS HAD supported SVG and XHTML then
the W3C would have come under tremendous pressure to force out
that HTML5 standard. I don't think they would have liked that
any better.
Ted
