meyerweb.com

Skip to: site navigation/presentation
Skip to: Thoughts From Eric

Meta-change

Now here’s something I didn’t expect to see when I woke up this morning:

Microsoft Expands Support for Web Standards: Company outlines new approach to make standards-based rendering the default mode in Internet Explorer 8, will work with Web designers and content developers to help with standards behavior transition.”

Seriously, that’s the title and subhead of Microsoft’s latest press release.

About halfway through, there’s this from Ray Ozzie:

…we have decided to give top priority to support for these new Web standards. In keeping with the commitment we made in our Interoperability Principles of being even more transparent in how we support standards in our products, we will work with content publishers to ensure they fully understand the steps we are taking and will encourage them to use this beta period to update their sites to transition to the more current Web standards supported by IE8.

See also the IEblog entry Microsoft’s Interoperability Principles and IE8, where Dean Hachamovitch says:

Microsoft recently published a set of Interoperability Principles. Thinking about IE8’s behavior with these principles in mind, interpreting web content in the most standards compliant way possible is a better thing to do.

We think that acting in accordance with principles is important, and IE8’s default is a demonstration of the interoperability principles in action.

In other words, the IE team seems to have used recent Microsoft PR efforts to their, and our, advantage.

I’m relieved and glad on the one hand, and a little worried on the other.  It’s not like the issues I discussed, or Jeffrey wrote about, have gone away.  It’s just that the way in which they’re handled by IE has shifted—which in some ways is a huge difference.

I think what worries me most is the possibility that when the public beta hits, there will be enough incompatibility problems that pushback from other constiuencies forces a change back to the original behavior.  I hope not.  I hope that what will happen is that any problems that come up will be addressed by spreading the news far and wide that there’s a simple one-line fix for those sites.

I’m glad that IE will act as browsers have always done, and default to the latest and greatest in the absence of any explicit direction to the contrary.  I’m doubly glad that the IE team is willing to do that, even knowing what they have to handle.  And I’m triply glad that the proposal was made in public ahead of time, with plenty of opportunity for debate, so that we could have a chance to weigh in and affect the browser’s behavior.

47 Responses»

    • #1
    • Comment
    • Mon 3 Mar 2008
    • 1812
    Joseph James Frantz wrote in to say...

    Hooray! Um…That’s all I wanted to say.

    • #2
    • Comment
    • Mon 3 Mar 2008
    • 1814
    Alan Bristow wrote in to say...

    This is great news.Thanks for relaying it Eric. I have Reader pointed to the IEBlog, but don’t check the feed as often as I should (Tsk, Tsk me).

    • #3
    • Pingback
    • Mon 3 Mar 2008
    • 1819
    Received from Refresh:

    [...] that’s good. Make you believe that even IE is susceptible to [...]

    • #4
    • Comment
    • Mon 3 Mar 2008
    • 1825
    prisca wrote in to say...

    Thanks for this post – read your pointer on twitter and it’s really news that cheers me up :)
    Looks like we can move forward in a more positive direction now …

    • #5
    • Comment
    • Mon 3 Mar 2008
    • 1837
    Jason Friesen wrote in to say...

    I’m pleasantly stunned. Eric, can you speculate on what caused MSFT to make this subtle, but incredibly important change? I’m going to guess it was the furor over their previous announcement, but am I missing something there?

    Thanks for posting — caught the update on Twitter as well.

    • #6
    • Comment
    • Mon 3 Mar 2008
    • 1838
    Julian Schrader wrote in to say...

    Yay! That’s some great news… We won! ;_)

    • #7
    • Comment
    • Mon 3 Mar 2008
    • 1853
    Chris Casciano wrote in to say...

    The discussion of how to future proof web documents doesn’t belong in the hands of any one vendor because its a problem with all, but MS hadn’t come at it from my point of view as a publisher of web documents, the initial proposal was very much a business decision that seemed to be solving some specific vendor level problems.

    To your concern, I’d hope they don’t find a business cause to once again reverse course. Preventing that, I’d want to think that the answers to some of the questions raised by the community [how do you ID the browser in these modes, when will it end / can you ever end of life the "ie7web", can you freeze to Ie8 vs. IE8.0.1] and the difficulty of implementing the desired default behavior without breaking other parts of the web are part of why the decision was made. If it was, those hurdles will do as much to prevent your feared re as the standards community and other educated authors.

    • #8
    • Comment
    • Mon 3 Mar 2008
    • 1901
    Brad Dielman wrote in to say...

    I have to say when I first heard about version targeting I was against the whole idea. After a while I warmed up to it, but hated the default behavior. I’m glad to see that they are reversing their position on this.

    • #9
    • Comment
    • Mon 3 Mar 2008
    • 1901
    Jonathan Kahn wrote in to say...

    Now here”s something I didn”t expect to see when I woke up this morning

    Bit of a hell-freezing-over moment, eh?

    In other words, the IE team seems to have used recent Microsoft PR efforts to their, and our, advantage.

    Well yes, but I don’t think this is primarily about PR — it’s about European competition law. The EC are serious about restricting anti-competitive behaviour, and I think Microsoft are genuinely worried. Their lawyer’s even quoted in the press release, saying that the new default “removes this question as a potential legal and regulatory issue”.

    Of course, the community reaction helped too.

    • #10
    • Comment
    • Mon 3 Mar 2008
    • 1903
    Jake wrote in to say...

    Score one for the standardistas! :)

    • #11
    • Pingback
    • Mon 3 Mar 2008
    • 1914
    Received from IE8 Standards Compliant, Finally by Elliott C. Back

    [...] possibly the best suggestion the Microsoft IE team has ever made. Here’s a choice quote from Eric Meyer: I”m glad that IE will act as browsers have always done, and default to the latest and greatest [...]

    • #12
    • Comment
    • Mon 3 Mar 2008
    • 1924
    Bridget Stewart wrote in to say...

    I think this is a step in the right direction. I realize all too well, the issues that Jeffrey and you outlined still exist. However, I couldn’t get past the idea of “crippling” the web in order not to “break” it. I couldn’t comprehend how the web would be permitted to freely grow and improve, technologically, if that which is old remains the default.

    I personally feel that Microsoft is best positioned of all the browser manufacturers to educate and advocate for standards where the general public is concerned — based on market share. Explanations as to why some websites don’t look (or behave) the same when the browser is upgraded could go a long way to prompt different types of sites to keep up with the times — or how to “fix” it with a single line addition in a meta declaration.

    I really think this step is the for the best in the advancement of standards, overall. Those who have never head of them before, may now become aware that they exist and are beneficial. While not all folks maintaining websites will be as highly educated in the use of standard technologies as professional developers, nor will all those folks be able to implement them, there is a stronger chance that standards will be more widely acknowledged. How can that be bad in the long run?

    • #13
    • Pingback
    • Mon 3 Mar 2008
    • 1929
    Received from IE8 opt-in becomes IE8 opt-out » Broken Links

    [...] is a very wise decision, IMHO (and I’m not the only one to think so). Standards-aware developers can code their sites to meet the latest standards in all [...]

    • #14
    • Comment
    • Mon 3 Mar 2008
    • 1930
    Benson wrote in to say...

    I’m impressed that Microsoft has the kahones to change their flawed decision. I can only hope Ozzie and company will keep this new stance and gain more credibility in web standards.

    • #15
    • Comment
    • Mon 3 Mar 2008
    • 1935
    Josh B. wrote in to say...

    Fantastic (means ‘greatandunbelievable‘) reversal, I agree. I was struck too by the “regulatory issue” that IEBlog alluded to, and re: Jonathan’s comment above:

    Well yes, but I don”t think this is primarily about PR — it”s about European competition law.

    So does this mean that Opera’s drum-banging made a difference? I think most people wrote them off at the time as trying to redirect some eyeballs in their direction…

    • #16
    • Comment
    • Mon 3 Mar 2008
    • 1940
    Neal wrote in to say...

    I sort of see this like having your cake and eating it too. If users want to “freeze” their site in a certain version they can but people who are more knowledgeable can skip that step. For all those “mom and pop” websites that break, it’s a simple fix of adding the header tag and for the rest of us, we don’t have to do anything. I’m sure even the most standards aware developers will still find a kink or two with IE 8 but it will only be because they were working around IE 6 or 7.

    • #17
    • Comment
    • Mon 3 Mar 2008
    • 1942
    Neal wrote in to say...

    Eric what’s with the “1940″ number under the date in my post?

    • #18
    • Comment
    • Mon 3 Mar 2008
    • 2118
    Eric Meyer wrote in to say...

    Jason, I think a lot of it has to do with the “Interoperability Principles” which were announced on February 21st. I think those made it possible to push the case for change internally and win. Because as just about nobody was willing to believe, the IE7 default wasn’t the first choice for the IE team. (If it were, they wouldn’t have made this change, but would instead have found a way to justify the IE7 default under the “Interoperability Principles” umbrella.)

    I certainly think that the community’s reaction played into this, and I suspect that the team cherry-picked some of the more cogent and concise objections to bolster the case. And certainly the fact that so many people opposed the default behavior would have influenced the team’s decisions: if the whole community had let loose a mighty “Amen!” and broken into songs of joyful praise, they’d probably have stuck to the IE7 default. (Not that anyone would have expected that, of course; I’m just sayin’.)

    Some have speculated here and elsewhere that the EU anti-trust investigations are a significant factor, and pieces of the press release and blog post certainly support that interpretation. I’m not sure that IE is so big a piece of the Microsoft ecosystem that its behavior would significantly affect legal actions by the EU, but I Am, as the kids say, Not A Lawyer. Nor have I read closely what’s been going on with the EU and Microsoft. So I could well be missing a Freedom-of-the-Seas-size boat there.

    • #19
    • Comment
    • Mon 3 Mar 2008
    • 2119
    Eric Meyer wrote in to say...

    That’s a timestamp, Neal.

    • #20
    • Comment
    • Mon 3 Mar 2008
    • 2211
    Georg wrote in to say...

    So, the ‘opt-in’ becomes an ‘opt-out’. Problem more or less solved.

    No all we need is a high degree of “standard compliance” in IE8, and I’m a lot more optimistic about that part too – now.

    • #21
    • Pingback
    • Tue 4 Mar 2008
    • 0022
    Received from IE8 to Default to Super-Standards Mode | GrantPalin.com

    [...] to his involvement in the process, Eric Meyer unsurprisingly has a post on this development. He’s cautiously pleased, but wary of possible reversals of this decision [...]

    • #22
    • Pingback
    • Tue 4 Mar 2008
    • 0134
    Received from about: X-UA-Compatible, this time really for real

    [...] Official anouncment and some people’s reactions. [...]

    • #23
    • Pingback
    • Tue 4 Mar 2008
    • 0440
    • #24
    • Comment
    • Tue 4 Mar 2008
    • 0749
    Mike wrote in to say...

    Chalk one up for the lawyers – never thought I would say that line!

    • #25
    • Pingback
    • Tue 4 Mar 2008
    • 0810
    Received from X-UA-Compatible: Sensible Defaults · All the Billion Other Moments (Jason Penney)

    [...] Meyer, who wrote one of the two articles on A List Apart that started off this whole discussion, posted his reaction to the change yesterday. While generally very positive, he makes an important observation: I think what worries [...]

    • #26
    • Comment
    • Tue 4 Mar 2008
    • 0906
    Martin Lambert wrote in to say...

    I know it’s not the most popular thing to give Microsoft a lot of credit, but I believe that at least part of this is due to the fact that IE7 is already pretty darn good. The switch from 6 to 7 was painful because 6 was so incredibly out of date, 7 was a great leap forward, and thus the changes in Standards mode were huge. This time around I think there will simply be a lot less that will break.

    I’m willing to bet that surfing the web with their internal builds of 8, and seeing that almost everything that worked with 7 still looks fine, went a long way toward convincing them that this would be ok…

    • #27
    • Pingback
    • Tue 4 Mar 2008
    • 0953
    Received from IE8 - Browser Identity Concerns Fixed | Beyond Caffeine

    [...] think that Eric Meyer sums it up nicely in his post where he indicates that not all issues with the meta tag are gone (which will still exist but not [...]

    • #28
    • Comment
    • Tue 4 Mar 2008
    • 0958
    jive wrote in to say...

    If they really want to support standards they need to support SVG. SVG will open up a whole new world of applications.

    • #29
    • Pingback
    • Tue 4 Mar 2008
    • 1157
    Received from La domo de karotoj » Mikrosofto aŭskultis la negativecon pri la meta-etikedo

    [...] oni decidis kontraŭ la ideon. Tio estas [...]

    • #30
    • Comment
    • Tue 4 Mar 2008
    • 1346
    John Arthur wrote in to say...

    Great news indeed.

    I said it on Zeldman, I’ll say it here, and elsewhere: I’ll gladly give some time to educate mom ‘n pops, or even fix their sites. It’s just one line of code, and that’s if you can’t send the header through the server. I think this is a good chance to reach out, help, etc., and we should maybe get an effort together.

    JA

    • #31
    • Pingback
    • Tue 4 Mar 2008
    • 1652
    Received from blog of matthew moore » Journey Though the Internet

    [...] Eric’s Archived Thoughts: Meta-change; "Microsoft Expands Support for Web Standards…" – http://meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/2008/03/03/meta-change/ [...]

    • #32
    • Comment
    • Tue 4 Mar 2008
    • 1717
    Mark Johnson wrote in to say...

    As I commented on WaSP, hooray! Yet another reason to look forward to the year 2013! </snark>

    • #33
    • Comment
    • Tue 4 Mar 2008
    • 1926
    Chris Blown wrote in to say...

    The pushback will come anyway, regardless of this latest back flip. We saw it with IE6, IE7 and we’ll see it again with IE8. Several large organizations we deal with have resisted IE7 like the plague. When asked why and what evidence they have to oppose such an upgrade, the IT staff just shrug and say it’ll probably break everything and mumble something about Vista. This is a sentiment passed down the line from Microsoft, and its hard for these IT staff to shake it. But you’re right here Eric, it certainly won’t speed up adoption. And that is really the main stumbling block for the success of IE8.

    That said I prefer it this way round than the other :)

    • #34
    • Comment
    • Wed 5 Mar 2008
    • 0015
    David Thomson wrote in to say...

    I think M$ marketing department were finally made aware of the long term implications for their previous decision and the penny dropped. I’ve argued consistantly around the traps that opt-in would kill not only IE but, all the tag soup readers and generators in the M$ portfolio. Good to see that the big picture has finally been seen and understood.

    There has been alot of the ‘it doesn’t feel right’ posts in blogs about opt-in. Mostly, because the big picture about the opt-in implications are hard to articulate from the multi-perspective user/developer of the web. But at the end of the day, this gut feeling was the correct one and its good to see that the tech guys in M$ were able to put a constructive, well-thought out argument to marketing around the choices M$ has berfore it. Well done.

    Btw, has anyone heard from JZ lately, he seems to have gone a bit quite…

    • #35
    • Comment
    • Wed 5 Mar 2008
    • 0024
    David Thomson wrote in to say...

    Oops, did I say opt-in? That was naughty, I meant opt-out. Though I was thinking otp-in for standards.

    • #36
    • Comment
    • Wed 5 Mar 2008
    • 0804
    Eric Meyer wrote in to say...

    You mean besides his post and various followup comments yesterday on zeldman.com, David? Or did you have a different JZ in nind?

    • #37
    • Comment
    • Wed 5 Mar 2008
    • 1448
    Matt Rossi wrote in to say...

    1 Giant step in the right direction. Hopefully the momentum sticks with them. Finally getting the message heh.

    • #38
    • Pingback
    • Thu 6 Mar 2008
    • 0458
    Received from Microsoft Internet Explorer 8 - bza.no

    [...] om at IE8 likevel ikke bruker IE7 renderingmode som standard, men heller tar skrittet dit alle interesserte ville gå er fremtiden plutselig lysere. Betydningen av dette er markant ettersom den opprinnelige [...]

    • #39
    • Pingback
    • Thu 6 Mar 2008
    • 0958
    Received from Dave Stevens » Blog Archive » Internet Explorer 8 (beta) released

    [...] earlier this week that IE8 will have standards-based rendering as it’s default mode (via Meyerweb), I’m more inclined to check it out sooner rather than [...]

    • #40
    • Comment
    • Thu 6 Mar 2008
    • 1053
    Stephanie Sullivan wrote in to say...

    I think my favorite part of that post is part of Ray Ozzie’s quote:

    “…we have decided to give top priority to support for these new Web standards…”

    New Web standards – wow.

    • #41
    • Pingback
    • Thu 6 Mar 2008
    • 1800
    Received from Big Ahha » Blog Archive » Web Standards 180: IE8 To Be Web Standards Compliant By Default

    [...] I only hope that Microsoft maintains their newfound focus on standards and, as Eric Meyer stated: [...]

    • #42
    • Pingback
    • Sat 8 Mar 2008
    • 1858
    • #43
    • Pingback
    • Tue 11 Mar 2008
    • 1243
    Received from Andre’s Blog » Blog Archive » links for 2008-03-05

    [...] IE 8 to default into standards mode. “Microsoft Expands Support for Web Standards: Company outlines new approach to make standards-based rendering the default mode in Internet Explorer 8, will work with Web designers and content developers to help with standards behavior transition (tags: standards ie ie8 html ie7 microsoft web browser) [...]

    • #44
    • Pingback
    • Thu 27 Mar 2008
    • 1048
    Received from Best Of March 2008 | Best of the Month | Smashing Magazine

    [...] APIs. And (hurrah, hurrah): IE8 will use Standards mode by default. Details, comments, analysis and ideas. And, finally, IE8 Readiness Toolkit for [...]

    • #45
    • Pingback
    • Tue 1 Apr 2008
    • 1916
    Received from Best Of March 2008 - juliomarroquin.com

    [...] APIs. And (hurrah, hurrah): IE8 will use Standards mode by default. Details, comments, analysis and ideas. And, finally, IE8 Readiness Toolkit for [...]

    • #46
    • Pingback
    • Fri 11 Apr 2008
    • 0507
    Received from about: X-UA-Compatible, Take 3 at weboholic.de

    [...] Official anouncment and some people’s reactions. [...]

    • #47
    • Pingback
    • Sun 31 May 2009
    • 1830
    Received from about: X-UA-Compatible, Take 3 « first things first

    [...] Official anouncment and some people’s reactions. [...]

Leave a Comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address required but never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>



Remember to encode character entities if you're posting markup examples! Management reserves the right to edit or remove any comment—especially those that are abusive, irrelevant to the topic at hand, or made by anonymous posters—although honestly, most edits are a matter of fixing mangled markup. Thus the note about encoding your entities. If you're satisfied with what you've written, then go ahead...


March 2008
SMTWTFS
February April
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  

Sidestep

Feeds

Extras