1. Pete LePage Product Manager Internet Explorer Team

2.  Standards are a means to an end  Interoperability

3.  Standards are sometimes ambiguous  Standards are evolutionary  CSS 2.0 became CSS 2.1  Internet Explorer 6 shipped in 2001  “Ship or wait for the committee”  Standards can be formalized after you’ve created your implementation

4.  Implementing standards is complex  There are many ways to solve a problem  Differences in coding styles can lead to rendering difference  Different priorities often leads to rendering differences  First implementation often becomes the “standard”

5.  ACID2  An attempt to force similar priorities  All browsers try to differentiate themselves  Widgets in Opera  XUL in Mozilla  ActiveX in Internet Explorer

6.  Ship cycles and Standards don’t always mesh  Ship now, or ship when the standard is baked?  What to do when the standard changes?  Then why not ship more often?  Every standard change, and every bug fix?  Multiple standards to track  Increased website updates

7.  History of involvement in standards bodies  Version over version compatibility

8.  Microsoft DOES care about standards  Active participant in several standards bodies  Cascading Style Sheets WG, Web API WG, Web Application Formats WG

9.  Every major change to IE run the risk of breaking existing sites  The Compatibility Conundrum  How do we move forward with standards while still pushing the envelope of web technologies?  Example: increasing the number of XMLHTTP connections allowed by the browser  Hard to change implementation after you’ve gone live

10.  “I’m really concerned that we’re breaking stuff in the name of goodness and that all users and developers will walk away with is ‘stuff broke’” Dean Hachamovitch General Manager, Internet Explorer Team

11.  In place compatibility  The committee’s finished, you should change your behavior

12.  Need to balance Standards Compliance with Site Compatibility  Doesn’t Mean Don’t Improve  We need to be careful

13.  Compatibility is a critical adoption factor  IE7 “Quirks Mode” mostly didn’t change  Standards mode is increasingly popular  2006: 40% of top 200 sites use standards mode  2003: 0.5% of top 200 sites use standards mode  A dedicated compatibility team focused on working with external sites

14.  Internet Explorer 7 has shipped  Easing the lives of Developers  Web Design Tool Bar  IE6 VPC – Highly requested!  Samples, Starter Kits, and Tutorials  IE Dev Center http://msdn.com/iehttp://msdn.com/ie  IE Blog  Evangelizing IE7’s better standards support  Explaining the new security features of IE7

15. Internet Explorer 7 Internet Explorer 6 VPC

16.  Has hit critical mass  Being delivered via AU and WU  15 languages are available today  Many customized versions  Yahoo!  USA Today  Google

17.  US Browser Market Share for 12/7/06-12/11/06 BrowserMarket Share (PC’s only) Internet Explorer87.12% Fire Fox11.80% BrowserMarket Share (PC’s only) Internet Explorer 718.87% Fire Fox 23.45%  Data from Web Side Story, an independent 3 rd party web analytics company

18.  Internet Explorer has a future  Improve the web application platform  Provide the best web user experience  We are committed to improving our standards support  We are committed to not breaking the web  Versioning and opting in will play a major role  IE.Next  It won’t be everything you want  It will be another big step in the right direction

19.  Prioritizing the bugs and features for IE.Next  Listening to your feedback  Symbiotic Relationship  Unless you don’t think improving standards for 87% of web users is important!

20.  Test your pages with IE7  Standards improvements may have changed how your site displays  Check your IE components  ActiveX, BHO’s and Toolbars need to be prepared for Opt-In and Protected Mode  Add RSS to your site  Create an OpenSearch provider  Give us your feedback, help us prioritize for IE.Next

21. © 2006 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Microsoft, Windows, Windows Vista and other product names are or may be registered trademarks and/or trademarks in the U.S. and/or other countries. The information herein is for informational purposes only and represents the current view of Microsoft Corporation as of the date of this presentation. Because Microsoft must respond to changing market conditions, it should not be interpreted to be a commitment on the part of Microsoft, and Microsoft cannot guarantee the accuracy of any information provided after the date of this presentation. MICROSOFT MAKES NO WARRANTIES, EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY, AS TO THE INFORMATION IN THIS PRESENTATION. Internet Explorer 7: The Route To Standards Compliance Pete LePage Product Manager Internet Explorer Team PLePage@Microsoft.com http://Blogs.MSDN.com/PeteL