As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 11 years ago.
less of how & more of a why question here...I tried searching around some & couldn't quite find the answer I was looking for.
I'm curious why conditional comments exist within IE? did Microsoft implement this into the different browser versions because they knew they were not standards compliant?
I know certain version of other browsers can be targeted using conditional comments but those for IE far outnumber any other browsers.
I'd be interested in hearing any info regarding the origin & history of conditional comments.
They implemented it with ie5 and saw it as a good thing to optimise sites for IE.
Conditional comments have certain advantages over scripting methods of browser detection.
Low client-side impact.
When a downlevel browser encounters a downlevel-hidden conditional comment, the browser skips over the HTML inside the comment, and the content elements are not parsed, downloaded, or rendered. This saves client machine resources.
No script required.
Conditional comments do not require scripting and DHTML, and when no scripting is used in a Web page, no scripting engine needs to be loaded. Conditional comments are processed during the downloading and parsing phase, so only the content that is targeted for the browser is actually downloaded. Conditional comments can be combined freely with other browser detection techniques.
Separate code from detection logic.
Using conditional comments, script logic can be separated into smaller and simpler segments of code, which are easier to maintain and understand. Plus, code segments are loaded only by the browser version for which they were intended.
Cross-browser.
Conditional comments have been around since Internet Explorer 5, but their use is not restricted to Internet Explorer alone. Conditional comments can be used to customize content delivered to browsers that support conditional comments and those that do not.
more info: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms537512(v=vs.85).aspx
Related
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
I am a relatively new web apps programmer.
I have done differents web apps when HTML 5 were becoming (let's say) the new HTML standard.
So I want to know whether it is a good idea to migrate some of those apps to HTML 5.
By the way, I never have used HTML 5 in any web application.
What things do I have to keep in mind before do a migration or starts new web applications?
I mean: browsers, frameworks, javascript libraries, etc.
Thanks in advance!
In my opinion the best way to enter in the world of HTML5 is using solid libs/frameworks that ensure your code degrade gracefully on older browsers.
One cool site to grab some tricks and hints is the HTML5 Rocks.
I'm a experienced GWT developer (and I recommned it to Java developers), but I think that "the next big thing" may come from Dart.
In the Javascript world, nothing beats the jQuery lib. Of course, in my opinion =)
HTML5 is fully backwards compatible with previous versions of HTML. A few things are deprecated or obsolete, but browsers will still accept them until you can change them to something more up-to-date.
To start using HTML5, just replace your doctype with <!DOCTYPE html>
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
I designed a web page using my own css. I ran them on Google Chrome and Firefox. Web pages looked like same and no problem. But in IE, all pages are very ugly. I have used many css styles which do much more. But those css s don't work in IE. If I use basic css,then I ll have to use more images and do more things to get the same look( I want to save time to work with functions in client side and server, and don't like to spend time designing). also If other available css frameworks are used (jQuery), then useless styles and images will be loaded which can cause to slow the web page loading. I used css reset style sheet.but it didn't solve my issue.
I want to make my pages nice in IE as in Chrome and FF and do less with css.And not to use more css frameworks? What Can I do for this?
Should I have to do all css works again which works for IE (spending time..:( )?
Edit: I looked into sources of many web site which are in my web site's type. They also have used basic css and used many images for a better look. but I want to focus on functioning and deslike to spend time editing images and dor much more with desigining.
You can use a tool called pie.htc which allows you to use css3 properties in IE.
It dosent fix everything but surely helps, and all you need to do is a simple CSS property.
Learn more here :
http://css3pie.com/
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 11 years ago.
A friend of mine just pointed out an interesting phenomenon... I went to the Google home page and looked at the source code:
<!doctype html><html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"><title>Google</title>
...
...
...
A LOT OF STUFF HERE
...
...
...
</script>
... so I noticed that source code doesn't have the closing </body> and </html> tags. Using Chrome's Inspector, it shows the closing tags but when I right click and look at the source, its not there.
What is going on here? Am I missing something? I tried using the W3C HTML Validator and it showed a bunch of errors...
http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http://www.google.com/
So... what's the deal?
Google has a semi-official answer as a youtube video.
Basically when considering they're handling hundreds of millions of requests, they try to minimise the number of bytes sent per request. It's a tradeoff between validation, size and compatibility with different browsers used across the web.
No real-world browser actually rejects invalid HTML. Google is more concerned about supporting lots of different browsers, and optimising their home page down to the byte level. Whether they are right to be so pedantic about optimisation, I don't know, but they sure do serve a lot of pages.
See some answers here
Is it necessary to write HEAD, BODY and HTML tags?
W3C Validation says it's valid. From html 4.
Also In HTML5, there are no "required" or "optional" elements exactly, as HTML5 syntax is more loosely defined.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 12 years ago.
I was thinking about learning HTML5 (in fact, I've leant a bit of CANVAS object).
But my question is if it would be reasonable to learn it: is it already fully standard?, or is it going to change?
Thanks.
HTML5 (or just HTML) will never be "stable". The official specification documents what browsers are doing, and it'll always be behind what different browsers are capable of doing. Instead you should consider each piece/feature on its own: is it supported in the browsers you need it in, and if not, can you degrade to a different experience for users browsing from non-compatible browsers?
A really good resource to have in your toolbox is http://html5doctor.com/. They have detailed information that is updated frequently on most of the features grouped together under the HTML5 label.
HTML5 is a collection of thousands of features. Some of them are stable, some of them are not.
But you really only need to worry about browser-support. If a feature is implemented in all modern browsers, then it is safe regardless of whether it's a HTML5 feature or not.
So it is reasonable to learn about those HTML5 features that are already implemented in the browsers. You can check out which those features are here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_layout_engines_(HTML5)
You can use as much or as little as you wish since it's backwards compatible with v4.01.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 13 years ago.
It's been rumored that IE8 will be Microsoft's final release of IE (When I asked this question, someone pointed me to an article on Slashdot -- Yes, I know, it's Slashdot, but it cited an article on InfoWorld -- in any case, there seems to be some legitimate concern regarding Microsoft's continued support for IE, at least in its present form).
What are their future plans for an HTML-rendering engine?
Microsoft is apparently not making great strides towards making the current Trident engine compliant with CSS3, so I was simply wondering if they are instead looking the replace it with a next-generation engine (I've heard the code-name "Triton") or abandoning it in favor of a competing platform (such as WebKit, as Reed Copsey points out in his answer).
Why the aggressive downvoting? This is a legitimate issue for anyone who is planning on using IE as an embedded control.
The two most common speculations I've seen are that the rendering engine would be replaced by something based on Gazelle or Webkit. Personally, I think Gazelle is a much more likely possibility.
That being said, I don't think IE 8 will be teh last release of IE - I think it's more likely that it may be the last released of IE using the current codebase's rendering engine and core parsing routines. I would suspect that MS would rewrite their internals, but I would highly, highly doubt that Internet Explorer is going to go away as long as Microsoft is still writing software.