IE 7 RC1 acid2 test
IE7 RC1 has gone public. And according to the IE Blog, there were quite a few bugfixes. Kudos for that! It will take a while before we can actually drop support for IE 6, and I think this applies to the most of us, since some even still support IE5 for mac..
So I decided to give it a try.. Installation was a bit tricky, because it didnt complete the first time I tried it and the second time it took around 20 minutes to complete.. After the reboot it would hang when i tried starting it, but when I started it ‘without add-ons’ it worked. Sadly I won’t be able to use it because the ‘manage add-ons’ is grayed out so I can’t disable the troubling add-ons.. And no add-ons, means no flash..
I wanted to run IE 7 through the acid2 test and see if it would be any better than the last versions.. Here’s the result (click to enlarge):
As you can see, although the Internet Explorer team fixed a lot of bugs, it’s not quite yet near to standards… although it is a lot closer than the previous version.
Firefox still has some bugs too, right now the only browsers that are fully acid2-compliant are Opera 9 and KHTML-based browsers such as Safari and Konqueror.
Comments
Pierre •
Acid test has nothing to do with standards. Also, if a browser passes the acid test, that does not mean that it's standard compliant - it only means its engine has been optimized for acid. Think about it.Stefus •
"Acid test has nothing to do with standards""Optimized for acid"
That is sooo cute
Pierre, here's your homework: http://www.webstandards.org/action/acid2/guide/
BOLK •
see ACID2 in FireFox 3.0 alphaEvert •
Pierre:You are right, browsers can pass the acid test without being fully standards compliant.. but it does make use of tests that browsers typically fail, so it can be used as an indicator, somewhat ;)
Krsytal •
hey im just testing to see if this bug is still here on safari.. delete later.SomeGuy •
Stefus: instead of being condescending, you should try to read the page you linked to. Let me quote it: "Everything that Acid2 tests is specified in a Web standard, but not all Web standards are tested. Acid2 does not guarantee conformance with any specification." So yes, a conformant browser should be able to display ACID2 properly, but displaying ACID2 does not mean anything. At all.And yes, a browser could be optimized for ACID. Let me take a practical example: you're a browser vendor and you have 1453 bugs in your bug tracker. 12 of them prevent ACID2 from being displayed properly, the other 1441 are unrelated, which ones will you fix first? Now with 1441 bugs left and a perfect ACID2, is your browser fully conformant to any specificaition? (Hint: answer is "Who knows?")
Sorry for being off-topic btw :)
boots •
@SomeGuy: by the same token, NOT being able to display an Acid test DOES say something. In particular, it means a browser is certainly not standards compliant (this is in-line with the classic falsification principle as proposed by Karl Popper)So yes, passing the Acid test is certainly not the be-all-end-all in terms of compliance certification but failing the test gives certainty that there are compliance issues.
some other guy •
anyone clinging to the acid test as some sort of compliance for CSS rendering is missing the point.it means very little in terns of a browsers ability.
if u really knew what it was doing, youd ofcourse realize that theres no DTD in the DOC Type and which rendering mode it was switchign ie6/7 to (nope not almost standards mode either..)
Evert Pot •
Hi some other guy,http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.webstandards.org%2Ffiles%2Facid2%2Ftest.html%23top
The only issue they have is that they didn't provide encoding..
However, I also checked if it's valid CSS, but it doesn't seem to be!
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?profile=css2&warning=2&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.webstandards.org%2Ffiles%2Facid2%2Ftest.html%23top
The bugs are minor, but your point is valid (tentatively)
Evert