[thelist] General Statement - There's Bugs in Everything

[Paul Bennett]

um, a 'crib sheet' for every known web browser, mobile device, screen 
reader, etc etc 'Bags not' writing that one?

I recall working with wml and some developers had developed an xml file 
with all the known device capabilities for each wap device. The xml 
files became so ludicruosly large that they were practically unusable 
unless your serevr could handle running them once a day and caching the 
entire file in memory....

For me, the crib sheets are hosted by the W3c, and are commonly referred 
to as 'web standards'
The more we get together, code to, and promote this, the less we will 
have to worry about IE6, 7 , 8 bugs and the more attentuion browser and 
device manufacturers will pay to getting the standards support correct 
for their software.


Jono wrote:

>
> On Oct 24, 2004, at 8:29 PM, Ken Schaefer wrote:
>
>> Someone on this list once said that applictions should never ship with
>> bugs - my personal opinion is that that particular person simply isn't
>> aware of the bugs in their applications - any non-trivial application
>> these days has "bugs" in it. Whether they are really coding errors, or
>> the result of other factors (eg misunderstandings or incomplete
>> communication between end user and developer) is another issue.
>
>
> I've gotta' disagree.  We have/are constantly developing a CMS, and 
> updates and revisions are deployed to our current clients every now 
> and then with more features and enhancements.  Those new builds are 
> not installed until they are tested to the bone, and all bugs are 
> worked out.  I have spent hundreds of hours over the past few months 
> running this CMS through every conceivable situation and function, 
> once all of these situations and functions are working, the new build 
> is uploaded.  Of course this CMS is released into a controlled 
> environment, but the end users, for the most part, have free reign to 
> do as they please with the CMS and it's content after deployment.
>
> Browser bugs are a bit unforgivable.  Developers of web browsers know 
> what the browser they are building are supposed to do, and I am sure 
> they test them, right?  Why don't browser developers/programmers test 
> all possible situations?  Maybe there should be a universal testing 
> crib sheet for all browser developers...maybe there already is?  If 
> you're gonna' put your name on something, at least in my case, it's 
> GOT TO WORK like advertised...then again, Microslack doesn't really 
> advertise that IE is supposed to do anything, except browse the web.  
> I guess they don't really guarantee that IE is going to display every 
> page correct.  BUT, MS could guarantee that any web page build, 
> following the same guidelines set forth by the developers "crib 
> sheet", would display properly.  Web developers, and browser 
> developers/programmers could all feed off of the same "crib sheet" 
> sorta' like a lot of people here feed off of w3c for standard 
> procedure.  I have never looked into the "crib sheet" theory, maybe is 
> already exists?  If not, lets get git er'  done!
>