Dean Edwards: IE8?

Comment: #1

IE7 So it’s official: Microsoft have announced Internet Explorer 7.0.

Why not IE+ or something? That way it doesn’t collide with any legitimate version number.

How about IE6.5?

Brainstorming: I don’t think you’re going to rename IE7. But if you do, I suggest IE<7 if MSIE7 has good standards support or J. King’s suggestion, IE+, otherwise. Another possibility is DE7 for Dean’s Explorer, but I like JFC for IE, shifted, with better CSS. Of course, I have ulterior motives for that last suggestion. }:-]

Comment: #5

IE8? :p

EI7?

Comment: #6

IE+, sounds good.

Comment: #7

How about “Standard IE”…?

Comment: #8

How about something that reflects the true nature of your project, such as “IE That Actually Works Correctly” (IETAWC for short)

Comment: #9

How about “Goodie”? Good – IE…

Comment: #10

It has to be an abbreviation that is compatible with the MS Conditional Statements. IE8 is good.

Comment: #11

I like IE+ too. (or IE++)

Comment: #12

Or IE# (IE-sharp)

Comment: #13

IE.NET sounds nicer,doesn’t it?

Comment: #14

That IE stands for ‘Internet Explorer’. How about to say “this IE stands for ‘Internet Exploder'”?

Comment: #15

Thanks for all the suggestions.

Much as I like IE+/NET/# etc. I think I’ll probably settle for my first choice, with an additional byline:

IE8 – one step ahead

Comment: #16

“One small step for Dean; one giant leap for webkind.”

Well, maybe not so small…

Comment: #17

OK. One more.

IE-heaven

What d’ya reckon?

Comment: #18

I like the sound of IE+, the “one step ahead” catch-line is also good as well.

Comment: #19

You should stick with IE7 I guess. From a marketing point of view that would probably be the best. Especially since everyone linked to you as if it was called IE7.

Comment: #20

Dean,

I agree that it is important to be “one step ahead”.

But the point I look at now is different. I think the naming is one thing, the functionality the other.

ie7 if I understood correctly was intended to “fix” some missed out functionalities in browsers such as MS IE 5, MS IE 5.5 and MS IE 6.

So as MS IE 5 was a big step forward to standards compliance as also MS IE 6 later was I think that any major new release of MS IE is gonna be a bit alike the same.

Ok, to get to the point. What is the project about? As I understood the intention was to make the IE in any version to comply with w3c standards only limited by the version of the IE used by this itself limiting ie7 to any IE of Version or above.

When I first found your project I was surprised as I had never heard of MS IE 7 But that name was and is catchy. And while thinking over and about that name and the project I found always that the name makes sense.

As conflicts with the current version number of MS IE can never be avoided I would suggest to get rid of the expected to be next version number of the IE as no one except MS themselves knows what they see as being “required by the customer” to be implemented.

As announced IE7 will only be available for Windows XP and newer Versions of the Windows OS family.

So as I for example use Win2K Pro I’d still need compliance with w3c standards to be implemented “through the backyard as the entry is VIP only”.

Hence I’d like say, stay with ie but get rid of the version number and replace that with an acronym stating the fuinctionality or a catchy synonym word that makes clear what all this is about.

Eg., ieSC (wich could mean ie Standards Compliant), or ieValid (wich is quite self explanatory I guess)

The target audience for ie7 is not the end user but rather those who create web sites and web applications. So the name could contain phrases or acronyms or “join the bandwagon slogans” as long as these are well known to this group.

As I look to it you do already use this kind of notation for the script collections shipping with ie7 as per now.

Go on with your work, it’s very helpfull.

regards

ralf

P.S.: Sorry, english is not my native tongue, so please forgive any wrong spellings and if any phrase I wrote could be interpreted in more than one way I for sure meant the one that doesn’t blame, hurt or offend someone or anyone at all.

Comment: #21

Anne, your comment is giving me a headache.

Comment: #22

I’m kind of surprised no one has suggested IE7up yet. How about that?

Comment: #23

I suggest “IE Crutch”. Describes the purpose, reasonable expectations, and seems to be original enough.

Comment: #24

How about IE7-eleven ,where you get a brain freeze from using it.

Comment: #25

“Unless there are significant improvements to Internet Explorer’s support for web standards, …” I am pretty sure that won’t happen. There will be a few added features and maybe a few added security provisions, but the big core of bugs and wrong implementations will remain the same. No need to worry, MS is commited to ignoring standards and providing backwards compatibility to its own bugs.

Comment: #26

I think that you definitely should change the name. It’s too confusing with the new MS IE7 on the way. I think Ralf’s suggestion is the best of the above. Your IE7 is after all an addon/fix/extension to IE, and not a new version of IE.

Comment: #27

I think IE+ suits the project quite well. Infact as stated earlier it is not a new IE it is an addition to IE. Something that makes the older version of IE better. IE Plus IE+ for short maybe, and add a slogan like mentioned one step ahead, a step towards compliance.

Comment: #28

The slogan could be “a step towards standards”.

Comment: #29

PerfectIE

Comment: #30

When have Microsoft ever followed rules? The W3 need the power of the search engines behind them to start rewarding website developers for compliant sites (in terms of rank positions) and browser manufacturers (in terms of a good boy sticker). Only then will Microsoft be forced to adhere to the standards because ultimately it’s the clients that want a site that works. Collectively, Google, Yahoo and W3 can force MS to sort it out. Maybe they should name it ‘Interplus Webzilla 1’, oh, and where’s the kitemark that says W3 Approved?

Comment: #31

You should fork your project. Keep IE7 for <= IE6, and have a new project (IE8 would make sense) for fixing the MS IE7 bugs that we all know will exist. Combining the two will give you too much headache.

Comment: #32

Project-X7 Beta7 OmegaIE7 Shell7 IE-Octal IExtreme bah… I give up

Comment: #33

Fie E (as in: fie on bad implementation of standards … or Firefox-like IE.)

Comment: #34

FOX-IE ??

Comment: #35

EI7 – looks a lot like E17 which is already taken, twice! http://www.enlightenment.org/ and an aging boy band.

Comment: #36

“Standard IE” or “Standards IE” isn’t bad. How about IE-W3C, perhaps? Is there anything that IE7 supports that isn’t a W3C standard?

Comment: #37

Heh – go after ’em for infringing on you – after all, you had IE7 first!

Comment: #38

I like IE++ as well. Other posibilities. CSS-IE. W3-IE. Mod-IE. Fix-IE < — I like this too.

Comment: #39

How about something simple like “IE7 Dev Standards” or “IE7 – Dev Standards”. Extending the name with some mention that it is intended for developers might help some confused noobs understand that they cannot download and install “IE7” (well at least not your IE7 :-). By adding to the name in this way you don’t have to give up IE7 because of a naming conflict, since it is still perfectly relevant. IE7 Dev Standards (IDS) IE7 Dev Compliance Patch (IDCP) IE7 Standards Lib (ISL) Or: IE S.E.V.E.N. (Standard Elevating Vigor Enhancing Nostrum) – needs more work

Comment: #40

The Browser the Way You Want It I’m in awe of Dean Edwards’ IE7, considered by many to be the CSS rosetta stone for Microsoft Internet Explorer (MSIE), which also still happens to be the most widely used web browser on the planet. For the long-frustrated…

Comment: #41

How about DEIE 7!

Comment: #42

How about IE Hotfix #17539362026?

Comment: #43

Personally I don’t really care what it is called – but it is confusing for a lot of people. Every time I tell someone they should use IE7 to make their life easier I have to then immediately expain I don’t mean a browser, etc. I think it will get worse as MS-IE7 gets closer to release.

I’d get away completely from the IEx naming scheme – you have a *great* ‘product’ here, give it a name to stand on its own. Going to IE8 will just cause confict in the future, and it still causes browser confusion when you tell someone about it. “IE8? I thought IE7 was current was the latest.”

How about PIE – Patched Internet Explorer. I mean, everyone loves PIE!

Comment: #44

I like DIE7 myself – but pie is cute too – I think if you try IE8 you’ll just have to keep renaming the thing…and it’s annoying to have to do that…IE+ is probably the most “professional” solution for a name

Comment: #45

Copying some stuff I posted in the support forum: — I just like the word play of Patched Internet Explorer or PIE! Everyone loves PIE! Have some PIE! The web is better with a slice of PIE!

And then all the releases can have codenames – cherry, apple, pumpkin, rhubarb, lemon…

Damn I need a good night’s sleep.

…

Hey, sign up Weebl and Bob to be spokes, um, egg-things: http://www.weebl.jolt.co.uk/pie.htm —

OK, yes, I know I’m being a bit silly.

Comment: #46

I like many names that have been proposed here, for example DIE7 or IE+. But I think these ones are better:

– “DIE”: without the number, so as to be prepared for the necessary changes to fix MS IE 7.0, when this one gets released.

– “IE-FOX”: instead of “FOX-IE”, it sounds better. It could explain that it patches IE so as to look more similar to firefox (because this browser does respect the standards).

Keep the nice work!

Comment: #47

[…] write the script yourself, or take a look at Dean Edward’s IE 7 project (inevitably time for a name change now, right Dean? ) Related reading The Real Reason Microsoft Won’t Supp […]

Comment: #48

ie-N? or ie2006 or ie-mix

Comment: #49

IE 8 will only delay the problem.

I like IE Plus with IE+ for short, it’s meaningful and looks nice. It also seems to be the most popular sugestion here!

Comment: #50

how about IE6.5? or IE6.9 ;D

it maintains the “better than IE6” but also maintains that it is fixes for previous versions or IE (5, 5.5, 6, and not 7).

Comment: #51

Comment: #52

Given the target of the project, I suggest “stdie”.

Comment: #53

Did the project at least get a new name? I would like to know…send me by eMail please. You as the blogowner got it…beside, I never saw such a minimalistical blog that did rock like yours. Congratulations.

All the ebst, Chris

Comment: #54

Hello, I am webmaster of site “zone of browser-Firefox and IE”(http://firefoxmozilla.free.fr). And now I am preparing a topic of firefox3 and IE8, if you like, maybe we can work toghter. Thank you for your answer. By the way, my site is in french.

Comment: #55

Hey, I think PIE is good. Or PIE7?

Comment: #56

Hi! I’ve included IE8.js on a project I was working! It really fixed every IE6 bug that I encountered, but on IE7 didn’t fix css selectors like input[type=text]. So I parsed the source code and saw that for IE7 it has only [class=whatever] and pseudo classes as unknown css selector. Could you tell me why is that? Because IE7 doesn’t know [type=] either. I then modified modified line 883 to:

var CLASS = “\\[\\w+=?[^\\]]*\\]”;

And this fixed [type=] selectors too!

P.S. I was using IE8.js 2.0 (beta3) with IE7 version 7.0.6001.18000

Comment: #57

Hi, your png transparency is not working when we use another png file. when we use same name which already in your file then it works. what’s this? please resolve the problem

Thanks Ravi kumar

dean.edwards.name/weblog/2005/02/ie8/

IE8?

Comments (57)