R_a_V_e_N Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 I don't want to start a flame war, I want to know which browser is the most standards complaint that is avilable to public excluding internal builds, betas etc. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Weed Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 Amaya Opera Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abc@home Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 Judging from the acid2 test opera seems to be the most compliant. And opera also seems to be more compatible with ie standards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AQUaDeX Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 Standard complaint... Well Lynx maybe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_demilord Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 KHTML, (Safari, Konqueror) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johndoh Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 Just out of interest, does anyone know how many web sites are themselves standards compliant? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_demilord Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 Just out of interest, does anyone know how many web sites are themselves standards compliant? 586424333[/snapback] Not much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pallab Posted August 26, 2005 Share Posted August 26, 2005 Opera is the most standard compliant browser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathiasdm Posted August 26, 2005 Share Posted August 26, 2005 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid2 Konqueror and Safari. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commodore Max Posted August 26, 2005 Share Posted August 26, 2005 Firefox is good for standards, but definetely not the best. Opera, Konqueror, and Safari are your best bet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rguy84 Posted August 26, 2005 Share Posted August 26, 2005 Just out of interest, does anyone know how many web sites are themselves standards compliant? 586424333[/snapback] I can name 3 or 4 off the top of my head :pinch: W3C Bobby Section 508 (or is it 509 :blush: ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcv Posted August 27, 2005 Share Posted August 27, 2005 Judge for yourself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_layout_engines I'm pretty sure that Opera is by a tad, when you count all the standards (HTML, XML, XHTML, CSS, DOM, ECMAScript, etc). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxikk Veteran Posted August 27, 2005 Veteran Share Posted August 27, 2005 safari according to the acid2 test. http://webkit.opendarwin.org/blog/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceDogg Posted August 27, 2005 Share Posted August 27, 2005 safari according to the acid2 test.http://webkit.opendarwin.org/blog/ 586438984[/snapback] I was about to ask about this.. You beat me to it. I have never used safari, but would like to.. don't have a mac though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megamanXplosion Posted August 27, 2005 Share Posted August 27, 2005 Just to clear up a few misconceptions... Amaya is NOT standards compliant. It "supports" a lot of standards but it doesn't really "comply" with any of them fully. CSS support sucks, for instance, and that is one of the most important standards to support - in my opinion. The Acid2 test is not a full suite of tests designed to test the compliance with any particular standard. It only tests a very small subset of several standards - the most common rendering problems, to be specific. You should not use the Acid2 test as a "be all" solution for testing a browser's compliance with a particular standard. You can use it as a "this browser isn't effected by these particular bugs" test, nothing more. With that out of the way, I think Opera is the most standards-compliant browser on Windows (it supports practically everything I have ever tried to do.) Gecko-based browsers come second (Firefox, Mozilla, K-Meleon, etc. do not support CSS list counters, the ability to position/float generated content, etc. and those are some of the most interesting features in CSS.) Trident-based browsers are at the very end of the line (Internet Explorer and others - they don't allow a LOT of things that the standard allows.) I cannot really give any objective opinions on Linux or Mac browsers. I may dust off my Ark Linux CD and put Konqueror through some of my personal tests (CSS experiments that follow the standards very closely and do not cater for any browser) and see how it fairs. That may give me a good idea of how standards-compliant Safari is, as well, since their rendering engines are fairly similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rguy84 Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 Gecko-based browsers come second (Firefox, Mozilla, K-Meleon, etc. do not support CSS list counters, the ability to position/float generated content, etc. and those are some of the most interesting features in CSS.) 586440936[/snapback] Uhm, I think you may want to reword this. I have a few sites that have floated stuff...that I primarily did in Firefox and it all works... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megamanXplosion Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 Uhm, I think you may want to reword this. I have a few sites that have floated stuff...that I primarily did in Firefox and it all works... It describes the problem perfectly. You seem to have missed the bit about "generated content," or simply don't understand what I mean by it. li:before { position: relative; right: 120px; top: -2px; } By "generated content," I meant the ability to use CSS to create the :before and :after psuedo-elements, and Firefox cannot apply positioning to them (position or float rules.) Firefox supports the ability to position and float regular elements, but it cannot position/float the psuedo-elements. That ability opens the door to many interesting effects: generated arrows, for submenu items in a drop-down menu system; interactive navigation hints, using the title='' attribute text on the anchors; and more. It is one of CSS' greatest features, in my honest opinion. It is a shame that Opera is the only browser, on Windows, that supports it. I hope my comment makes more sense to you now :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rguy84 Posted August 30, 2005 Share Posted August 30, 2005 It describes the problem perfectly. You seem to have missed the bit about "generated content," or simply don't understand what I mean by it. li:before { position: relative; right: 120px; top: -2px; } By "generated content," I meant the ability to use CSS to create the :before and :after psuedo-elements, and Firefox cannot apply positioning to them (position or float rules.) Firefox supports the ability to position and float regular elements, but it cannot position/float the psuedo-elements. That ability opens the door to many interesting effects: generated arrows, for submenu items in a drop-down menu system; interactive navigation hints, using the title='' attribute text on the anchors; and more. It is one of CSS' greatest features, in my honest opinion. It is a shame that Opera is the only browser, on Windows, that supports it. I hope my comment makes more sense to you now :) 586442259[/snapback] Oh ok I see what you mean now. It just allows you to set stuff in "before" or "after" a tag. I think it would have been clearer if you would've said puesdo classes because .ex { float: left; color: blue; } is generated ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elliott Posted August 30, 2005 Share Posted August 30, 2005 WebKit seems to be the most standards compliant rendering engine, and also the only one currently passing the Acid2 test in nightly builds. Also, an interesting tidbit that Safari supports Multiple Backgrounds as specified in the CSS3 spec: http://webkit.opendarwin.org/blog/?p=15 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megamanXplosion Posted August 31, 2005 Share Posted August 31, 2005 Oh ok I see what you mean now. It just allows you to set stuff in "before" or "after" a tag. I think it would have been clearer if you would've said puesdo classes because [snip] is generated No, that's not generated. You are applying styles to already-existing objects that are within the document tree (DOM.) When you apply a :before or :after psuedo-element they are not a part of the document tree (DOM,) they are simply shown on the screen - they are "generated" content. I think you will find the Generated content, automatic numbering, and lists portion of the CSS 2.1 specification interesting :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dekker Posted September 1, 2005 Share Posted September 1, 2005 Standards compliance will always be a moving target as the W3C move things forward the browsers play catch up, so in some ways the question is meaningless if all one wants to do is be a browser x fanboy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megamanXplosion Posted September 2, 2005 Share Posted September 2, 2005 Standards compliance isn't really a moving target. The standards do evolve but the evolutions usually aren't recommended for several years. I would hardly call CSS 2.1, XHTML 1.1, etc. moving targets, for example. The only browser that truly needs to catch-up is Internet Explorer (because the development team was working on the Windows Graphic Foundation for Windows Vista for the last few years), the others just need a few small tweaks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crossbonez Posted September 3, 2005 Share Posted September 3, 2005 Judging from the acid2 test opera seems to be the most compliant. And opera also seems to be more compatible with ie standards. 586423886[/snapback] Safari / Konqueror both jus passed the acid2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chavo Posted September 3, 2005 Share Posted September 3, 2005 Safari / Konquerorboth jus passed the acid2 586475525[/snapback] Current version of Konqueror doesn't pass it, but the 3.5 alpha comes very close. When 3.5 is final it will pass. The 4.0 branch already passes so it's being back ported to 3.5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moglenstar Posted September 3, 2005 Share Posted September 3, 2005 hmm, as already said, i would have to go with opera.. when im site-designing, in css and xhtml, i always design for opera, and fix for ff/ie/etc .. so my main "style.css" or what have you works 100% in opera, then i just have "ie-fixes.css" and "ff-fixes.css" as nescessary, and etc, with all needed "hacks" and fixes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts