<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: An IE7 CSS test suite</title>
	<link>http://www.webdevout.net/tidings/2006/08/20/an-ie7-css-test-suite/</link>
	<description>Updates on the march of progress. A weblog about web design, standards, web browsers, and the overall health of the Web.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 20:22:42 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: David Hammond</title>
		<link>http://www.webdevout.net/tidings/2006/08/20/an-ie7-css-test-suite/#comment-1147</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Aug 2006 03:04:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.webdevout.net/tidings/2006/08/20/an-ie7-css-test-suite/#comment-1147</guid>
					<description>Most of the issues are incorrect implementations of CSS features, but some are features that are missing altogether, such as &lt;code&gt;outline&lt;/code&gt; and &lt;code&gt;:before&lt;/code&gt;. I only point out such issues once per feature, and I don't count features that rely on missing features. For instance, the missing support for &lt;code&gt;:before&lt;/code&gt; is indicated, but I don't bother to test counters and positioning of generated content because at this stage it would be redundant.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Most of the issues are incorrect implementations of <abbr title="Cascading Style Sheets">CSS</abbr> features, but some are features that are missing altogether, such as <code>outline</code> and <code>:before</code>. I only point out such issues once per feature, and I don&#8217;t count features that rely on missing features. For instance, the missing support for <code>:before</code> is indicated, but I don&#8217;t bother to test counters and positioning of generated content because at this stage it would be redundant.</p>
<p class="postdetails"><em>Posted using (Not Specified) .</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Jeff Fohl</title>
		<link>http://www.webdevout.net/tidings/2006/08/20/an-ie7-css-test-suite/#comment-1146</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Aug 2006 02:58:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.webdevout.net/tidings/2006/08/20/an-ie7-css-test-suite/#comment-1146</guid>
					<description>David -

This is very interesting. I really like this approach in that it gives a quick visual indicator of whether something is working properly or not. The Acid2 test, which is sort of a binary test - either it works or it doesn't - doesn't provide a lot of information in the output of the test as to what is exactly working and what is not. Of course, you are focusing specifically on things that you consider to be bugs in IE7 only - so perhaps I am comparing apples to oranges here.

This test seems to suggest that you see 30 bugs currently in the rendering engine of IE7b3. How do you define a bug? Does a CSS specification that is not supported count as a bug, or only incorrect implemenations of specifications?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>David -</p>
<p>This is very interesting. I really like this approach in that it gives a quick visual indicator of whether something is working properly or not. The Acid2 test, which is sort of a binary test - either it works or it doesn&#8217;t - doesn&#8217;t provide a lot of information in the output of the test as to what is exactly working and what is not. Of course, you are focusing specifically on things that you consider to be bugs in IE7 only - so perhaps I am comparing apples to oranges here.</p>
<p>This test seems to suggest that you see 30 bugs currently in the rendering engine of IE7b3. How do you define a bug? Does a <abbr title="Cascading Style Sheets">CSS</abbr> specification that is not supported count as a bug, or only incorrect implemenations of specifications?</p>
<p class="postdetails"><em>Posted using (Not Specified) .</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
