>
>
> I was going to reply earlier with the meta I use, which is:
>
> <meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge,chrome=1">
>
> This does what Philippe describes as well as utilize Chrome Frame if the
> user has it installed.
>
>
> > Right now we use a tag on our pages that tells the page to render in IE7:
> > <meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=7">. In working on a new
> > splash page all looked good in Firefox, Chrome, Safari but there were
> some
> > strange things going on when I looked at it in IE8. I see that when I
> > change the meta tag to display the page in IE8 instead of IE7 most of
> > those issues go away. So with that in mind:
> >
> > If we change the meta tag to display in IE8 instead of IE7 what will
> > people who are using IE7 see (what mode will our page be displayed in)?
> We
> > no longer are supporting IE6 and below. Depending on the answer to this
> > question, perhaps we should stop developing for IE7 as well. What's your
> > opinion?
>
> For _new_ documents, you should always push IE to display in the latest
> mode (that it supports):
> <meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge">
>
> Then test in older versions and add some adjustments as needed (i.e.via
> conditional comments).
>
> [snip]
>


> With the HTML5 doctype, IE 6 and up will all render in 'strict' mode, or
> their understanding of it…; there are some differences with what you use
> now (strict vs transitional). But as noted above, adjust for older browsers
> if needed.
>
> Philippe
> --
> Philippe Wittenbergh
> http://l-c-n.co
> m
>
>
> Thanks Phillipe and Tom. I read about using edge in the meta tag but in a
> number of places I found that it is recommended that edge be used for
> testing, not production. So, why not use: <meta
> http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=7,8,9,10" /> ? I realize that
> would mean we would have to update the tag whenever a new IE version comes
> out but it only appears once, in our head include.
>
>
>
That seems odd to me. Why test and develop against 'edge', then back off by
substituting it with, say, 8 before going live? Seems like you'd be running
the risk of adding problems back into your page. Maybe I'm just not
understanding it all enough.


-- 

Tom Livingston | Senior Interactive Developer | Media Logic |
ph: 518.456.3015x231 | fx: 518.456.4279 | mlinc.com
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [[email protected]]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Reply via email to