<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Web Standards and IE 8</title>
	<atom:link href="http://somadesign.ca/2008/web-standards-and-ie-8/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://somadesign.ca/2008/web-standards-and-ie-8/</link>
	<description>Winnipeg Web Design · WordPress Development · Print Design</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 19:09:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://somadesign.ca/2008/web-standards-and-ie-8/#comment-16</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2008 06:07:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://somadesign.ca/blog/web-standards/web-standards-and-ie-8/#comment-16</guid>
		<description>@Víctor: I don&#039;t like it either. But I&#039;m willing to put up with it if it produces a better, more standards-compliant rendering engine in IE 8. Zeldman does make &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.zeldman.com/2008/01/22/in-defense-of-version-targeting/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;a good point&lt;/a&gt; that it&#039;s standardistas such as us who will ensure that our sites are using the latest and greatest. 

While this does have the unfortunate side-effect that non-standards-based developers can carry on their merry way, I think that they&#039;ll continue to go the way of the dinosaur in the face of the higher quality websites being built by those pushing web standards. I mean, they&#039;re just going to be stuck using the same old crappy rendering engine while we pump out beautiful, agile sites.

In the end, I think that this almost turns it into a competitive advantage for standards-based design.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Víctor: I don&#8217;t like it either. But I&#8217;m willing to put up with it if it produces a better, more standards-compliant rendering engine in IE 8. Zeldman does make <a href="http://www.zeldman.com/2008/01/22/in-defense-of-version-targeting/" rel="nofollow">a good point</a> that it&#8217;s standardistas such as us who will ensure that our sites are using the latest and greatest. </p>
<p>While this does have the unfortunate side-effect that non-standards-based developers can carry on their merry way, I think that they&#8217;ll continue to go the way of the dinosaur in the face of the higher quality websites being built by those pushing web standards. I mean, they&#8217;re just going to be stuck using the same old crappy rendering engine while we pump out beautiful, agile sites.</p>
<p>In the end, I think that this almost turns it into a competitive advantage for standards-based design.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Víctor</title>
		<link>http://somadesign.ca/2008/web-standards-and-ie-8/#comment-15</link>
		<dc:creator>Víctor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2008 04:30:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://somadesign.ca/blog/web-standards/web-standards-and-ie-8/#comment-15</guid>
		<description>Version targeting isn&#039;t bad. What is bad is not having the lastest rendering as the deafult, wich is a very mediocre attitude from Microsoft, and a step back into making a better web.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Version targeting isn&#8217;t bad. What is bad is not having the lastest rendering as the deafult, wich is a very mediocre attitude from Microsoft, and a step back into making a better web.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
