12 ms·
Yes, but IE9 will also be the new IE8 eventually. Perhaps automatic embedding of unicorns becomes the new css-gradient and textshadow in 10 years. Designing for
by metamemetics 16y ago
Yes, but IE9 will also be the new IE8 eventually. Perhaps automatic embedding of unicorns becomes the new css-gradient and textshadow in 10 years. Designing for the minority isn't a very good solution.
A better solution:
embedded SVG rendering within <img> and <htmlelements> cross browser. Then you can assemble ANY trendy graphical element without having to wait for people to continually agree on, release, and implement css4, css5, css6, etc.
Other benefits:
- it's an XML format like HTML
- Machines can now scrape understand and generate pictures too
- Vector graphics will scale great with different zoom\resolution settings
- Designers can use tools like Adobe Illustrator, a more logical approach than css-versionX hacking that fits the problem domain better
- ars 16y ago>Yes, but IE9 will also be the new IE8 eventually. I think the problem is that microsoft is tying the browser version to the OS version. Will you be able to install IE9 on XP?
- metamemetics 16y agoI don't think the underlying problem has to do with specific companies and applies to older versions of Firefox as well. The underlying problem is: (Demand\Rate of requests for specification changes) >> (rate of widespread implementation) ...ensuring there will always be a very narrow audience for the latest features. While it's good to increase the rate at which new specifications are implemented, it's largely impossible to do without authoritarian measures to A) control the programmers working on every web browser B) control specification committees to agree faster. edit: or C) make everyone use the same web browser Another approach is to DECREASE the rate of [edit: demand for] specification change. I think a large part of the problem is our expectations from the CSS specification. We are trying to expand its problem domain to include the construction of graphics and graphical effects, something which it was clearly not built for on a syntactical level! It might be better to convince browser teams with limited resources to better support long existing open standards to handle the dynamic creation of graphics with more logical syntax. Because the rate at which specification revisions are required will be drastically reduced. Whereas the process for creating new graphical features to your website via CSS is to submit it to a committee and wait 5years, it is done within the syntax of SVG. Making it a better allocation of resources.
- steveklabnik 16y ago> Will you be able to install IE9 on XP? No.
- masklinn 16y ago> Yes, but IE9 will also be the new IE8 eventually. not necessarily. IE6 wasn't the new IE4, and IE7 wasn't the new IE8. IE9 probably won't be the new IE8 eventually for a number of reasons: * Unless MS stops the IE project again (doubtful at this point), IE10 should arrive pretty close on the heels of IE9, say two years (similar to the delay between IE7 and IE8, or IE8 and IE9) * IE10 will very likely be compatible with Windows 7 (and Vista, but that's not as big an issue as it's been far less popular than 7) * Considering the two-steps improvements done in IE8 (CSS) and IE9 (more CSS, JS) the differences between IE9 and IE10 will very likely be much smaller than between IE8 and IE9, or IE7 and IE8. The problem here is stagnancy. IE8 is the last browser of its line compatible with Windows XP, and Windows XP has a huge install base and huge former popularity. This means the (MSIE, Windows XP) platform is now completely stagnant and it will not disappears until Windows XP does.