Talk:Comparison of layout engines (non-standard HTML)
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
How about adding a column or another section that shows what standard HTML/CSS code can be used to achieve the same effect as these non-standard tags?
I removed the assertion that XMP is equivalent to the PRE tag as it is simply not true. XMP does not render any of the tags that are inside it, while PRE will. Itsdannyg 17:08, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
- There is a w3C document with a different definition of the xmp and listing elements. Should this be noted somehow in the article? --Execvator (talk) 14:31, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
The LISTING element is portrayed so that at least 132 characters will fit on a line. The XMP elementis portrayed in a font so that at least 80 characters will fit on a line but is otherwise identical to LISTING.
- How about to make this in an extra article (similiar to blink and marquee) and then give here a very short explanation?!? Mabdul (talk) 14:46, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- Would it be notable enough to have its own article? Blink and marquee are "widely" known because of their usability and accessibility issues while xmp appears to be pretty unknown. I was thinking more about just adding a short footnote, if it should be mentioned. --Execvator (talk) 18:37, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- more yes/no's
- more versionnumber seeking
* MSIE Proprietary attributes (source: http://victor.transformadora.com/Oreilly/wdesign/wdesign/appd_01.htm ) rename of the article more deprecated tags an attributes on http://de.selfhtml.org/html/referenz/varianten.htm (german)
Just pointing out...
There are so many properties (of IE especially) missing, one could make an article just on those. For those who want to work on this article, see this MSDN page. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 02:43, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
- hey that is great! I was the user that expanded the page really, but I used sources from a few pages which alread tells that some that I wrote in the article. the problem is the that we have no information of the support of other engines... mabdul 0=* 19:33, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
The tag plaintext is not currently supported, at least by IE. It was a Microsoft extension to HTML so I don't think it belongs to the Deprecated HTML tags section. Perhaps there ought to be one for old W3C tags and another one for Microsoft extensions. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 03:08, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Actually, it was part of the HTTP 0.9 protocol, http://www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/AsImplemented.html --Random832 (contribs) 06:35, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
- the information I had i put on the page: the inormaton is published on the ref pages of the layout engines/webbrowsers pages mabdul 0=* 17:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
<blackface> & <shadow>
Both <blackface> and <shadow> are propitiatory WebTV tags, yet they are currently listed in the table of tags that were in a former W3C standard and then depreciated by a subsequent standard. Shouldn't these entries be moved from the Deprecated HTML tags section to the Proprietary HTML tags section? - MrKris (talk) 01:29, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Add/remove engines discussion
There is a discussion going on at Talk:Comparison of layout engines (Cascading Style Sheets)#Adding new engines regarding which engines should be added to/removed from the comparison pages. Requesting the participation of any interested parties. --Gyrobo (talk) 02:24, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
User:Ms2ger removed in September last year some proprietary tags and attributes from webTV and IBM web explorer. I know that both browsers never gained much usage share since the mostly worked only on operating systems that weren't so popular. Should we include such information or should we exclude/remove infomation from unpopular web browsers? I mean we are an encyclopedia that doesn't really care about popularity. mabdul 12:28, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Comparison of web browser engines which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 15:45, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Comparison of layout engines (non-standard HTML). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080706145821/http://www.seds.org/~spider/os2/webextag.html to http://www.seds.org/~spider/os2/webextag.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at
You may set the
|checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting
|needhelp= to your help request.
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
If you are unable to use these tools, you may set
|needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.
I would not ask or say this, but would anyone consider this suggestion:
- Adding the following layout engines: 1.) Blink, 2.) EdgeHTML, 3.) Goanna, and 4.) Tasman.
Should any of these layout engines be suitable for this comparison?