<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<essay xml:lang="en" version="5.0" xmlns="http://docbook.org/ns/docbook" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" xmlns:gal="http://norman.walsh.name/rdf/gallery#" xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/">
<info>
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
<title>meta http-equiv=X-UA-Compatible: Brilliant!</title><biblioid class="uri">http://norman.walsh.name/2008/01/26/X-UA-Compatible</biblioid>
<volumenum>11</volumenum>
<issuenum>16</issuenum>
<pubdate>2008-01-26T19:07:02-05:00</pubdate>
<date>$Date$</date>
<author>
      <personname>
<firstname>Norman</firstname>
	<surname>Walsh</surname>
</personname>
    </author>
<copyright>
      <year>2008</year>
      <holder>Norman Walsh</holder>
    </copyright>
<abstract>
<para>Well played! Spectacular! Five Stars! Home run! Perfect!</para>
</abstract>
<dc:subject rdf:resource="http://norman.walsh.name/knows/taxonomy#HTML"/>
<dc:subject rdf:resource="http://norman.walsh.name/knows/taxonomy#Rants"/>
<dc:subject rdf:resource="http://norman.walsh.name/knows/taxonomy#TheWeb"/>
</info>

<para xml:id="p1">Microsoft
<link xlink:href="http://alistapart.com/articles/beyonddoctype">rolls out</link>
a new bit of technology that
they can legitimately pitch as a solution to a problem (or problems)
that real customers already think they have.</para>

<para xml:id="p2">It's a solution that encourages vendor lock-in: if you're
generating those special meta tags for IE-bugs-du-jour, why not tell
your readers that they should only use the “right browser” for your
site? That should help shore up IE's sagging numbers.</para>

<para xml:id="p3">It's a pitch-perfect presentation of
<wikipedia page="Fear%2C_uncertainty_and_doubt">FUD</wikipedia>. Afraid
customers won't buy your insert-product-or-service-here if your website
doesn't work? (Why yes, of course, we worry about that every day!)
Are you unsure about the experience your customers are getting now?
(Well, yes, we don't really have the resources to test every possible
combination. Who does?) Do you doubt that the existing mechanisms are
working, that they'll continue to work in the future as we deploy newer and 
better browsers? (Gosh, now that you say it, I know there have been
problems.)</para>

<para xml:id="p4">It potentially raises the bar for competitors because they have
to support every conceivable collection of bugs
<emphasis>indefinitely</emphasis>!</para>

<para xml:id="p5">And, for extra bonus points, they got respectable people in the
web standards community to go along.</para>

<para xml:id="p6">Sweet!</para>

<para xml:id="p7">Technically, maybe it's a bad solution to the wrong problem. But
who cares, it's win-win-win in every other respect!</para>

<para xml:id="p8">[The author isn't generally prone to wearing a tinfoil hat and
ranting conspiracy theories, and he has had
<link xlink:href="agony">a rotten day</link>. We fear he may regret
this posting tomorrow. —Ed.]</para>

</essay>

