Sun, 2005-12-04 13:06
Hi Folks
Unless I have gone blind (he went to Specsavers), I haven't seen this information specifically set out in words of 2 syllables or less on this forum ...
IE7 will not recognise the * html hack (introduced deliberately in IE4) in STRICT mode. It will see it in quirks and Transitional modes.
This means, if you code to Strict DTD, you can safely continue to use * html to address pre-IE7 and IE7 will ignore it. Use transitional or no DTD (or other quirks mode triggers) and one almighty mess will ensue.
So, no more get a doctype messages. Now it should be 'get a strict doctype.'
The known bugs IE7 fixes are:
# Peekaboo bug
# Guillotine bug
# Duplicate Character bug
# Border Chaos
# No Scroll bug
# 3 Pixel Text Jog
# Magic Creeping Text bug
# Bottom Margin bug on Hover
# Losing the ability to highlight text under the top border
# IE/Win Line-height bug
# Double Float Margin Bug
# Quirky Percentages in IE
# Duplicate indent
# Moving viewport scrollbar outside HTML borders
# 1 px border style
# Disappearing List-background
# Fix width:auto
AND support now added for:
# HTML 4.01 ABBR tag
# Improved (though not yet perfect) <object> fallback
# CSS 2.1 Selector support (child, adjacent, attribute, first-child etc.)
# CSS 2.1 Fixed positioning
# Alpha channel in PNG images
# Fix :hover on all elements
# Background-attachment: fixed on all elements not just body
Also note that the old space required by pre-IE7 after pseudo selector has also been fixed:
* Fail - P:first-letter{ color: blue; }
* Fail - P:first-letter:hover { color: blue; }
* Succeed - P:first-letter { color: blue; } /* note the space between letter and the opening curly brace*/
* Succeed - P:hover:first-letter { color: blue; } /* note the ordering */
IE7 accepts all the above. So, if you used the lack of a space to fool IE, now it won't be, or even put the things in the wrong order, now it will accept it that way too.
This information was taken from here:
Improving the CSS 2.1 strict parser for IE 7
and
So, as MS tell us, there will be NO bugs 
Trevor
Sun, 2005-12-04 13:22
#1
Planning for IE7
There has been a discussion on the subject a while back.
What is bizarre is MS reasoning behind not implementing an xml parser, something to do with not wishing to implement a less than 100% complete parser and the difficulties in merging that with the tag soup parser, which is - as many point- out odd in that Mozilla managed to implement a lightweight xml parser and as it functions separately to the tag soup parser there should be conflicts, and accordingly the xml is relatively simple to include, oh well just have to wait for IE19 I guess.
Hugo.
Sun, 2005-12-04 13:34
#2
Planning for IE7
One problem they seem not to have mentioned is form controls being drawn over the html, meaning that any drop down menu slides under these form elements. The only fix to date is towrite a DOM script to detect if the menu conflicts with the form element, and if it does, to switch it off temporarily.
Another not mentioned is the font size in pixels fixes the font-size.
And no transparent borders.
They don't mention if the render engine will show paletted png's correctly either, although it will now support alpha channel pngs.
What about the dotted/dashed border rendering incorrectly on scroll?
Ho hum.
Trevor
Sun, 2005-12-04 13:48
#3
Planning for IE7
Ah bless them at least they're trying :roll:
So they haven't fixed transparent borders?
The fixed px sizing is a rather important issue one would have thought.
TBH I would except no less than 100% clear up of every single bug, they've had long enough to get to grips with them.
I've forgotten but they have fixed up height haven't they? otherwise that will cause problems.
Hugo.
Sun, 2005-12-04 20:34
#4
Planning for IE7
Hi Hugo
The blog says, essentially, 'wait for the beta 2 release.'
The last blog actually started by an MS bod was late October, still indicating beta 2 as coming. Have you seen anything as to its release date, or indeed has it been released?
Trevor
PS, I have been working on that 3 column design. I think I've got it down quite a bit now, thanks to the code used by Big John in his Jello Mold example, where the hacks for the older Gecko browsers are removed. I will post it later in the layouts forum for checking by all.
Sun, 2005-12-04 22:26
#5
Planning for IE7
All very well waiting but it would be nice to have some clue as to when but I can't find any nor can I - still - manage to find confirmation one way or another as to whether IE7 will be available as a standalone download (originally it was mooted that it would only be available bundled with new OS)
I also can not find definite confirmation as to whether they are fixing the height bug(expanding fixed heights) and whether min-width/height properties are being added.
If they fix? the star selector hack and don't fix the height bug a lot of pages are going to have problems in IE7, and we will be forced to use Conditional Comments.
It seems that MS still find it very hard to commit to clear information, I don't think that adding 'etc' to the end of a short list of css selectors to be added is very helpful really especially when the page supplying the info is by the developers and part of the developers network. what is the problem in supplying a complete list?
Hugo.
Sun, 2005-12-04 22:57
#6
Planning for IE7
Pretty much sums up my view too.
Tue, 2005-12-06 22:52
#7
Re: Planning for IE7
ClevaTreva wrote:
IE7 will not recognise the * html hack (introduced deliberately in IE4) in STRICT mode. It will see it in quirks and Transitional modes.
So, I am now told that MS, when they say 'strict mode' mean any valid Doctype, transitional, strict or whatever. In other words, MS Strict Mode means Standards mode to us. Makes you wonder whether they own a dictionary with IT terms in.
Also, I see that the next release will support the xml declaration without going into quirks mode.
Trevor
Wed, 2005-12-07 00:55
#8
Planning for IE7
they just have to express things differently :roll: thought that was a bit odd in reference to only working with strict doctype, MS have never been that refined.
Did know about the prolog but it was never actually about the prolog per se it was just a bug that stumbled over any characters before the DTD so they shouldn't really be patting themselves on the back for fixing another bug, it's not really that significant as rendering XML is not reliant on including the xml prolog.