Take 2345234..

I'll try explaining it again.

When IE6 came out, there wasn't a problem with all this because IE6 included a 'standards mode' (which wasn't exactly what it said on the tin, but that's beside the point) and 'quirks' mode, which renders like IE5. It was switched on the doctype, so if there was a valid doctype, standards mode was used. The badly written sites done for IE5 didn't tend to have doctypes. This was perfect at the time, and was also used when IE7 came out for its own quirks and standards mode. The point is, IE7 ALREADY has support for IE5/IE6 compatible sites built in. Having an IE7 mode in IE8 automatically includes IE5/6 as well. The reason noone had to update their sites when IE6/IE7 came out is because of this. So while you keep asking me why they can't just update their sites like they did when IE6 or 7 came out... the answer is, they didn't.

At about the same time, all the website tutorials etc saw that IE looked for a doctype, and recommended people put them in on their standards compliant sites. The same people who made broken IE sites just copied and pasted them in for new sites blindly. The end result being, doctype switching is no longer a reliable method of telling whether something is 'built for IE' or not. So, they had to come up with something new... hence this meta tag.

It absolutely helps advance the standards. If it wasn't there, users wouldn't use IE8 because all the sites would 'break'. So your lovely brand new standards compliant browser is shunned, everyone stays on IE7 which 'works' and nothing is achieved. With the tag, people can switch to IE8 and not notice the difference on badly coded sites. So, your claim that the tag holds back standards compliance is frankly rubbish.

What are you explaining?

You say that IE6 has a standards mode that wasn't. So bad pages still rendered incorrectly*. IE7 was supposed to have a standards mode that isn't. So bad pages still rendered incorrectly*. But a different incorrectly. IE8 is supposed to have a standards mode that may be (this time). So bad pages render correctly.

(*incorrectly in that a bad page should give bad output, showing that you have a bad page.)

Now if IE6 required you to change your page from IE5 to meet the new quirks, IE7 required you to change your page from IE6 to meet the new quirks, why do you not change your page from IE7 to meet the new quirks (W3C correct rendering)?

You did it before.

And you didn't need a meta tag.

And early IE6 there weren't any competitors (hence it stagnated a long time: MS killed off the IE team and used them elsewhere because they had won the browser war against Netscape). So you HAD to render for quirks. Now, however, a large and growing section of the internet and intranet (because of cross-site-scripting security problems) have other rendering engines. Much bigger a market than IE7 has. MUCH more than IE8 has. So you have already a pressure to make your pages work on these browsers.

And if IE8 has good standards compliance, if it works on these other browsers, it will work under IE8 too. So even if you have to keep IE7 for those legacy systems running closed source applications that will not be supported (see how nice lock-in is?), there's no need to use this meta tag: you already have a page that recognises IE7 and makes a quirky page that "works" on it and if it notices Firefox or Safari or Opera, gives out a page that works with them.

Well, guess what? IE8 you've told us tells the site that it is IE8 and not IE7, so the code that detects IE7 in your site and gives it the broken pages and if not IE7 gives it the W3C pages can give IE8 the W3C pages.

No need for the tag.

By NOT using the tag, W3C standards are more widely used.

By NOT using the tag, if IE9 doesn't support IE7 (or 6, 5.5, ...), you have no change to make, because IE9 will be W3C compliant. Hey, lookie! No work treadmill!

By using the tag, W3C standards are less widely used.

By using the tag, if IE9 doesn't support IE7, you have to change again.

Or is that what you're looking for? A continuing reason for employment?

Now if you REALLY want IE7 pages to remain pristine and unchanged, how about demanding that IE8 isn't used and IE7 remain the browser for your company? After all, that way you don't even need to put the meta-tag in! That's a LOT less work!

Your parting shot isn't a reason for having the tag. If your page is broken, you're stuck with IE7 (or hoping like heck the IE8 version of IE7 doesn't change and screw up your specific page). If your page is broken as per the standards, change it. And users wouldn't notice a difference looking at your page with IE8, Firefox, Opera, Safari, Lynx, ... If you're really trying to appear as you're thinking of the "user experience", then enabling people to use the browser they WANT to use on your pages is what you should be looking for. And the tag doesn't let that happen. You still have to change your pages to be W3C compliant.

Mark

"Now if IE6 required you to change your page from IE5 to meet the new quirks, IE7 required you to change your page from IE6 to meet the new quirks, why do you not change your page from IE7 to meet the new quirks (W3C correct rendering)?"

Erm, it didn't. Read what I said.

"And you didn't need a meta tag."

No, because they used doctype switching. Read what I said.

"And early IE6 there weren't any competitors (hence it stagnated a long time: MS killed off the IE team and used them elsewhere because they had won the browser war against Netscape). So you HAD to render for quirks."

No, you didn't have to render for quirks at all. IE6 had a standards mode, although a bit buggy and incomplete, was far better than quirks mode.

"IE8 you've told us tells the site that it is IE8 and not IE7"

As I and several people have said before, this is NOTHING to do with what the browser 'tells' the site. It is all to do with what the site tells the browser. IE8 will, I expect, report itself as IE8, yes. But that is completely irrelevant.

"so the code that detects IE7 in your site and gives it the broken pages and if not IE7 gives it the W3C pages can give IE8 the W3C pages."

There is no code that detects IE7 and feeds it a different version. Some sites do that, but this isn't what the issue is. Where on earth are you dragging this stuff up from?

"Now if you REALLY want IE7 pages to remain pristine and unchanged, how about demanding that IE8 isn't used and IE7 remain the browser for your company? After all, that way you don't even need to put the meta-tag in! That's a LOT less work!"

Yes, and this is why the tag exists. MS want people to upgrade, not just stick with old versions. Trying to persuade people to stick with old versions means progress is never made, and you end up with an even bigger mess in the future when there are old versions around.

"If your page is broken as per the standards, change it."

Yes.. that is the whole idea, and what is being worked towards. But what you are unable to grasp is the fact that businesses don't have time or resources to update their applications and websites to w3c standards in time for IE8s release. While you are sitting there harking on about standards, you have completely ignored the practicality of what you are trying to suggest. This tag will allow businesses to do a quick update on their websites to allow IE8 to work with it (which is important, IE is the most popular browser), allow IE to be standards compliant once again and be popular with users because it doesn't break sites, and allow people to drop IE5/6/7 use which are the problem causers.

How on earth you haven't 'got' it yet and figured out what is going on is absolutely beyond me. You are still going on about browsers reporting their versions to websites or something, when this has nothing to do with that. You claimed to be a website developer above... how you manage to do that and completely miss what all this is about (or even not understand what it is all about) is a bit worrying really.

If you still don't get it by now, there is no hope to be honest. I'm not going to waste my time repeating every point I make over and over again because you don't understand it (or don't read it, one or the other). If you come up with a sensible point I'll respond again, if you come up with the same old rubbish then there is no point going round in circles. If you still don't get it, read the other posts again carefully until you do.

OK, lets clear the crap away.

I don't get what you're saying because it makes no sense.

IE8 is W3C compliant. The tag isn't part of W3C. The tag doesn't add compliance to W3C pages.

When pages were written for IE6 and refused to give data to a browser that didn't identify itself as IE6, opera, for example, could set its ID string up to be IE6. This could be set per site or page.

This seemed to be very acceptable.

So why does there need to be a tag?

There is no reason.

Just in case you don't answer

The issue I have is that the tag isn't needed.

Opera tells sites that it is IE6,despite being W3C compliant, because it then tries its best to emulate IE6 quirks. IE8 can do the same.

And your company MUST be able to have time to change because they are going to have change forced upon it. Computer technology stands still for noone. They had time before (IE7 compatible pages were written and we haven't had IE7 long).

Why do you keep insisting that this is to do with what the browser reports as?

"When pages were written for IE6 and refused to give data to a browser that didn't identify itself as IE6, opera, for example, could set its ID string up to be IE6. This could be set per site or page."

[...]

"Opera tells sites that it is IE6,despite being W3C compliant, because it then tries its best to emulate IE6 quirks. IE8 can do the same."

How many times...

THIS IS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT THE BROWSER REPORTS TO THE WEBSITE AS.

It is completely irrelevant, virtually no sites switch behaviour based on the browser any more. It just isn't practical, it is very time consuming to code 5 different versions of a page to account for each browser.

Because that solves your "problem"

If you can't afford to upgrade your pages yet can still afford to upgrade your operating system (why this would be I cannot tell), a browser which identifies itself as IE7 will work.

IE8 can work as IE7.

OR

Don't upgrade IE7.

Problem solved.

No need to go through these pages and edit them. Leave them as they are. Even BETTER than asking people to add a couple of lines to ALL their pages (and CGI scripts, et al). And MS only has to do the work ONCE.

If the browser cannot report itself as IE7 because it isn't, then write a webpage that works with it. You did it before.

How can you put in capitals

THIS IS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT THE BROWSER REPORTS TO THE WEBSITE AS.

Because this tag is all about the website reporting itself as viewable on IE7.

There are more pages then there are browsers.

Heck, there are more websites than there are browsers.

So it only has nothing to do with browser ID strings because MS want YOU to do the work rather than them.

Why are you so adamant to do their work for them, when you can't do the work for your employer (fix the pages so they render on IE8 AS IE8 [W3C compliant])?

THIS HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH THE TAG BEING UNCECESSARY AND BREAKING W3C STANDARDS.