Internet explorer sucks big
- Ati putea sa credeti ca lucrind cu "sursa" html-ului (asta e o
exprimare stupida, html-ul e sursa ...) nu ati putea avea nici o
problema. Nu si daca folositi internet explorer pentru a explora si
salva diferite html-uri. Mai precis luati un link dintr-un html
oaracare si incercati sa puneti prin cale backslashuri (\). Sau
inlocuiti cite un / cu \. Sa lasam la o parte faptul ca IE-ul mere
bine si cu \ in loc de /. Dar chestia e ca le inlocuieste (dupa un
algoritm pe care nu am reusit sa il determin) si in "view page
source", si de asemenea cind le salveaza in html. Si asta intr-un mod
euristic, de ex. nu am reusit sa il determin niciodata sa imi ignore \
dintr-o cale de genul /images\/test.gif decit daca am bagat width si
height. Mai mult decit ultraciudat.
Si aceasta manipulare a sursei are loc chiar la una dintre cele mai
de ex. cind nu esti sigur ca ceea ce vezi tu este de fapt ceea ce e pe
server si ceea ce le este servit altor utilizatori (care e f. posibil
sa aibe alte browsere).
Iata si dupa ce m-am inspirat :
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 18:36:48 +0100 (BST)
From: Lloyd Wood <l.wood@...>
Subject: When what you see isn't what you get
One of our web users seems to have had a lot of trouble with broken
his personal webpages on our Apache webserver over the last couple of
Instead of / as a directory terminator, he'd have \. Or he'd have
stuff like /\Directory\ instead of /Directory/ in his broken links.
I'd put it all down to him being a Microsoft fanboy who didn't know
was doing; after all, he was generating the HTML pages using Microsoft
and therefore deserved everything he got.
(bugs in Frontpage such as leaving in local file:c:\\\ urls for
only the author gets to see incredibly fast-loading images when he
his composed pages, are well-known.)
However, I had occasion to use Microsoft's Internet Explorer 5.5
I went to view his pages to see the world through his eyes.
And, through his eyes, everything worked just fine, as if there were
backslashes there at all. Every known-to-be-broken link did just the
thing. Which was odd, because I knew the links in the pages stored on
Apache server hadn't changed.
So I viewed source in IE, and discovered... no backslashes. IE
out or converted the backslashes* before rendering the source to
even before rendering the source to 'view source'.
The user wouldn't know the backslashes were there, because IE was
*deliberately hiding and converting them* for him, presumably in order
compensate for the html rendering deficiencies of other Microsoft
and interoperability with non-Microsoft browsers be damned. The user
thought he was doing a good job, based on checking using the tools in
If you view source, you expect to see the actual source, and not a
prefiltered version. This filtering is clearly a risk in that it
behaviour that would previously have been clearly exposed as bugs in
composing products to stay, unnoticed and uncorrected, because it
can't trust the tool you're using, and because it screws up
testing. (Which, because IE comes from Microsoft, is hardly a