|
I couldn't give a damn about supporting unfinalised
standards the ACID3 tests
MS too sometimes speaks of Acid3 in dismissive terms as having little relevancy. Let's see and then decide by yourself, is this stuff important: DOM2 Core
DOM2 Events
DOM2 HTML
DOM2 Range
DOM2 Style (getComputedStyle, …)
DOM2 Traversal (NodeIterator, TreeWalker)
DOM2 Views (defaultView)
ECMAScript
HTML4 (<object>, <iframe>, …)
HTTP (Content-Type, 404, …)
Media Queries
Selectors (:lang, :nth-child(), combinators, dynamic
changes, …)
XHTML 1.0
CSS2 (@font-face)
CSS2.1 (‘inline-block’, ‘pre-wrap’, parsing…)
CSS3 Color (rgba(), hsla(), …)
CSS3 UI (‘cursor’)
data: URIs
SVG (SVG Animation, SVG Fonts, …)
(Taken from: http://www.webstandards.org/action/acid3/)Looks important to me. |
And as mentioned, one of them is a speed test which is affected by external circumstances.
I'm not saying its irrelevent, but I am saying that a 100% pass rate doesn't mean its 100% compliant with the things being tested. Furthermore, we shouldn't be punishing companies which aren't willing to implement support for standards which are drafts.
ACID2 was genuinely useful because it was all finalised standards. ACID3 though I think could have done better.. So its nice to pass, but a 100% pass just says you are compliant with 100 tests. I'm betting the compliance testing suites used by browsers are a LOT more comprehensive..