Mythbusting: Why Firefox 4 won’t score 100 on Acid3 | Hacker News Reader

Mythbusting: Why Firefox 4 won’t score 100 on Acid3

limi.net

269 pointsssclafani27 comments

IE9 version: http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/benchmarks/acid3/default.h...

It'll be interesting to compare the discussion here to previous times IE9's stance on ACID3 has been discussed / referenced.

A couple minutes of Googling brings up:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1859375

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1196054

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1399998

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1738681

Surely the correct thing to do would be to lobby to have these tests removed from Acid3 in favour of the separate font tests.

Webkit had to request changes to the tests in in Acid2.

http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/hyatt/archives/2005_04.html#0...

That's been done. WOFF was suggested as a replacement. It didn't happen.

Webkit had to request changes to the tests in in Acid2.

The Wikipedia page mentions that Acid3 was also updated to match Firefox's change in behavior:

"On 2 April 2010, Ian Hickson made minor changes to the test after Mozilla, due to privacy concerns, altered the way Gecko handles the :visited pseudo-class."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid3#Development_and_impact

Good information to know. Are there more current tests that are pushing the current generation browsers to implement new functionality?

Also, that site is beautiful.

> Are there more current tests

There's http://html5test.com/ (which is only so-so as a test, since last I checked it only tests whether a feature is feature-detectable, not whether it actually _works_ or anything, for the most part; see the "input element types" section in Safari 5, say).

Once IE is passing Acid3 or close to it, Hixie was going to consider working on Acid4, maybe.

Note, by the way, that most of the point of the Acid2/3 tests is not to push new functionality as much as to push correct implementation of _old_ functionality: stuff that's been specced for a while but is buggily implemented. This was less true of Acid3 than Acid2; last I heard the plan was for Acid4 to be more like Acid2 in this regard.

So are you really looking for new stuff, or correctly implemented stuff? ;)

Old, but here’s Ian’s initial Acid4 plans: http://www.hixie.ch/tests/evil/acid/004/

> Also, that site is beautiful.

Thanks!

Sounds very similar to how browsers are optimizing js engines towards specific test implementations.

Which is why really good tests are needed and also why a test can outlive its usefulness.

The article does not sound like that at all. There is not even a hint of the assertion that the browsers that do implement part of the SVG spec only did so in order to game the acid test.

It may remind you of such affairs, but people are likely to come away from your comment with a wrong impression of the article.

> I wrote this post since there isn’t a highly ranked piece on this if you search for “Firefox Acid3,” and there should be. Hopefully my site’s search engine ranking can be useful for something.

Am I missing something? Is his site supposed to have great google mojo? I ran the search he specified, as well as several variants, and couldn't find him in the first 12 pages. OTOH, Wikipedia's article on Acid3 [1], which is Google's first result, makes much the same point as he does. In fact, it cites him, which is probably a bad thing, given it's a blog.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid3#Development_and_impact

I just created this article a few hours ago. Google doesn't re-rank results that often, so give it some time. ;)

Well fine then. I presume it was you who added the Wikipedia link?

It was a user called Asqueela, although I suppose that could still be Limi.

Asqueela is not Limi. Both are well known.

Nope, I'm "Limi" on Wikipedia, but I don't think I've ever made any edits there.

…and there you go, it's now on the first page of the Google results:

http://www.google.com/search?rls=en&q=firefox+acid3

If it's such a technical difficulty, how does Opera manage to pass it still?

"Opera and Webkit implemented (very brokenly, in at least Opera’s case) a small subset of SVG 1.1 Fonts; basically just enough to pass Acid3."

Translation: We were unable to implement the same subset and now tell everyone it isn't useful in the 'real world'.

Sounds better than "It was too hard for us. Sorry."

Has anybody used SVG fonts on the Web? I'm curious.

I realize that there's a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem with browsers not supporting it, but it seems to me that the really good features start picking up traction even when only a few browsers support it (e.g. CSS transitions and animations, the latter of which Firefox still doesn't support).

If you wanted webfonts on iOS versions before 4, you had to use SVG fonts on that platform. They weren't great though, and having the choice to use TTF/OTF now is much better.

Uh... did you read the article? Did you read Robert O'Callahan's blog post it links to?

We sure can implement a broken version of SVG Fonts just to pass Acid3. We think doing that is 1) unethical and 2) bad for the web. So we're not going to do that.

It's not a technical difficulty. It's pointless, because WOFF does everything SVG fonts do, but is actually supported by font foundries and the Web in general.

great article!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com