But I though the assertion being made was that his page had been designed to be standards-conforming but not usable with IE; IE 8 opens his page quite happily (once you get past the inappropriate zipping which I think means no browser opens it as it is served by his webserver).
I assume the page doesn't open with older versions, or is his whole argument as broken as his page?
But I though the assertion being made was that his page had been designed to be standards-conforming but not usable with IE; IE 8 opens his page quite happily (once you get past the inappropriate zipping which I think means no browser opens it as it is served by his webserver).
I assume the page doesn't open with older versions, or is his whole argument as broken as his page?
I honestly don't know. Actually I checked it out because I thought it might be a drive-by download attack, so I saved the data to disk and ran the 'file' command on it (I don't think Windows has this command: it checks the data in a file and tells you what format it appears to be). That's how I discovered it was just a compressed web page.
I do know IE8 is supposed to handle the standards a lot better than earlier version, although I can't personally verify that.
I wasn't under the impression that the original page was intentionally made to not work in IE7, but that the author simply made it work in Gecko and then stopped working on it. I could be wrong about that though.
I like Linux too but I don't consider myself to be a Linuz zealot.
Liking Linux above Windows doesn't make you a Linux zealot. Thinking that you're so much better than M$ Wiblow$ loozers because you like Linux as you're so 1337 makes you a Linux zealot.
I like Ubuntu, but it is not as supported as Windows, in that the programs I use most are not written for Linux. Slowly but surely though Ubuntu will get there so I can think about replacing Windows, but just not yet.