Where have I been?


I know a few people have wondered why I appear to have stopped blogging altogether.


 


Well, the short version is because I did.  The longer version is that I got tired of dealing with the negativity  – although it’s been suggested that I turn off comments, that isn’t really me.  I don’t think “not listening” is the right approach. 


 


It was also frustrating, at the time, that we (the IE team) weren’t saying anything substantial about IE8 or our plans, and I got tired of walking the line.  That changed, obviously, when MIX08 rolled around and we released our beta 1.


 


Finally, and this was partly exacerbated by the previous issues, I was tired of things I said being taken too seriously, and getting jumped on.  For example, the unfortunately well-publicized back and forth last fall on ES4 – which might have been okay as 1) a statement of my personal opinion, or 2) an open exchange of ideas on the future of ECMAScript.  Unfortunately, it got blown into a much bigger deal than that, and that just made me depressed.


 


Anyhow, I’m going to take another run at it; there are a few things I wanted to comment on lately.  And you can always watch what’s going on with me on my Twitter, or check out my pictures on Flickr.

Comments (26)

  1. Steve says:

    Glad to see you back "online".  Look forward to your "thoughts", and I personally won’t take your "thoughts" as MSFT "carved in stone" decisions.

  2. thacker says:

    Wilson–

    Glad to know that you weren’t washed overboard from that raft. There is merit in Web .00018 and to say, <q>When I want your opinion, I will give it you.</q>

  3. robert says:

    welcome back, sorry about the negativity.  and hey good luck with ie8.

  4. WHAT!? You mean that your own private opinions aren’t that over your monumentally huge employer, and haven’t been checked over by a billion layers of bureaucracy!? You’re _ACTUALLY_ allowed to think for yourself!? Woah! What’s MSFT coming to!?

  5. Matt says:

    Glad to see you blogging again.  Next time the comments get you down, I suggest flipping through the comments on a few YouTube videos — you’ll remember pretty quickly how much weight anonymous internet opinions deserve.

  6. Kevin Yank says:

    Good to read you again, Chris. Look forward to hearing what’s piqued your interest!

  7. Lionel says:

    Welcome back, Chris!  Your readers missed you.

  8. Daniel says:

    Chris, nice to see you again. But please let’s talk honestly for a moment.

    You talk about negativity. It’s true that your opinions create more controversal duscussions than other peoples opinions. I’m understanding you. You’ve got my respect for that-

    But you must also see the really problematic part of your situation. While you’re truly try to make IE as great as possible one can’t understand why there’s so much non-standard going into IE8.

    I mean, you don’t talk about these things on mailing lists, you (MS actually) don’t give reviews for similar standards that are currently written. You simply put something new into IE and that is just annoying. You don’t even give reasons for that, it seems you try to bind web devs at IE again.

    Why implement CrossDomainRequests when there’s something similar in HTML 5? If you want some features let everyone think about that.

    Why implement some unknown ARIA-DOM when you could’ve opened the idea to everyone. The result could’ve been much better.

    I’m sorry, but MS just acts like they want to polish their image while still falling back to the bad habits of the past.

    That said. Thanks one more time for the standards work going into IE.

  9. There will always be undesirables on the internet and one of the most important things to remember is to not give any thought of merit to posts made by someone who spent less then ten seconds at your site, YouTube video, etc to post garbage or trash talk.

    As web designers we hated IE6, could deal with IE7, and are very much looking forward to IE8. It’s been under your direction that IE has been able to improve as much as it has. If you need a reminder of how far you’ve come just go back 3-4 years on the IE blog. The sentiment has greatly changed and while it won’t completely transition for a while the conversations have evolved to a more tolerable level (not every comment obviously but you know).

    Keep up your hard work, it is paying off and some of us actually appreciate it. 😉

  10. Luke says:

    I think what some people here fail to realize is that you are working for a Vendor, which puts you in a precarious position.   Microsoft is a public company (bring on GAAP rules), so you are further limited in what you can talk about (well further limited than say a Private company), yet people making comments also fail to realise that you have one arm tied behind your back

    I really do enjoy reading some of your posts and I hope that you look at this blog in a different light and continue to post. 🙂

    (I work for a public company/vendor as well, and there are a few outside engineers who get angry at me for not disclosing and understanding why we can’t talk about our projects so openly at times)

  11. Garry Trinder says:

    @Daniel: In fact, we had good reason not to implement the Web App WG’s XHR2+AC proposal – and since then, much of our feedback has actually been taken, and we’re converging, and making XDR compliant with Access Control.

    On ARIA, I have no idea what you’re talking about.  We’re implementing the ARIA standard, and attempting to be interoperable.

  12. Daniel says:

    Chris, every respect for your reasons, really. I just wonder why you (as in your team) implement first and then start discussing. The other way around would make much more sense?

    About ARIA, I meant the non-standard DOM properties like .ariaDisabled

    Discussing first seems important to me so you can figure out what’s possible for everyone and what is not. Microsoft got great spec writers, so there should be no problem.

  13. Daniel,

       XHR2+AC/XDR was just a bad scene.  Access control was not originally stated to be applied to XHR; we still, I think, disagree with that as a security decision.  At any rate, we should have been commenting earlier, and I’ve been clear about owning up to that.

    On ariaDisabled, there was a big flap about that that was completely out of place.  If you look at our OM, it naturally reflects attributes as properties with camelCasing, as most properties are in the HTML DOM; we have to tell our implementation not to do this, and the person who implemented this assumed we would want the attribute available as a property.  "aria-disabled" naturally gets reflected as a property named ariaDisabled.  Someone tried to paint this as evidence of our desire to introduce proprietary properties, when really, come on – sheesh.  I believe this has been resolved – either ariaDisabled has been added to the standard, or ariaDisabled is getting removed, I don’t remember which.  At any rate, using this as a stick to beat us with is simply ludicrous.  Perhaps you should go beat on the Webkit guys for adding so many new rendering features to CSS prior to discussing in the WG?

  14. Jon says:

    Chris, it’s great to see you blogging again. Whenever I read a post, blog or interview with you, you always seem very insightful, and often give me pause to reconsider my opinions on various issues.

    With respect to the issue of the negativity you face, I sympathise. While, as a working web developer, I understand the frustration many feel over Internet Explorer, I do despair sometimes at the amount of histronic and uninformed attacks that get thrown about, especially when they start to take on a more personal tone. The unfortunate irony is that the anger that built up during IE’s fallow years and the cocordant silence from Microsoft, is now being vented in your direction, despite the fact that your team are actually those trying to progress IE and open up a communication with the developer community! I sometimes think the entire web development scene, developers, vendors, et al, could do with a giant group therapy session. We could all scream and shout, and weep about our sorry lot for a few hours, then go home and continue our careers without all the baggage of the past twenty years. 🙂

    Like John B said above though, things have improved, and your efforts are appreciated by many. If you continue to progress IE and engage with developers and standards groups, things can only improve further.

  15. Daniel says:

    Chris, don’t worry I’m also against WebKit getting undiscussed properties. I’m also critical of Mozilla who want’s to copy some of Webkit’s properties. I think from this point of view Opera is the most "compliant" engine.

    About ARIA again: I don’t really dislike the idea itself, neither how you implemented it (though as part of XHTML I would’ve like it even more, but I understand what the current problem with XHTML is). But of what’s publically available there was just nothing that one could see come.

    Well, just promise to specify it as DOM ARIA Lv x someday 😉

    And sorry if my writings may seem angry, I’m actually a person who you can discuss fairly with, that’s why I can understand some of your problems as well.

  16. Medyum says:

    Chris, every respect for your reasons, really. I just wonder why you (as in your team) implement first and then start discussing. The other way around would make much more sense?

    About ARIA, I meant the non-standard DOM properties like .ariaDisabled

    Discussing first seems important to me so you can figure out what’s possible for everyone and what is not. Microsoft got great spec writers, so there should be no problem.

  17. Medyum says:

    Glad to see you blogging again.  Next time the comments get you down, I suggest flipping through the comments on a few YouTube videos — you’ll remember pretty quickly how much weight anonymous internet opinions deserve.

  18. medyum says:

    Good to read you again, Chris. Look forward to hearing what’s piqued your interest!

  19. hikaye says:

    welcome back, sorry about the negativity.  and hey good luck with ie8.

  20. Good to read you again, Chris. Look forward to hearing what’s piqued your interest!

  21. sesli says:

    This is a quarterly growth figure. It is standard practice in the United States to report growth data on an annual basis.

    thanks admin

  22. Thank you editors for the topic.Its include a lot of useful informations.i join this blog i couldnt see unnecessary arguments and it makes us happy thnx all moderator n editors.

  23. Thank you editors for the topic.Its include a lot of useful informations.i join this blog i couldnt see unnecessary arguments and it makes us happy thnx all moderator n editors.

  24. Thank you editors for the topic.Its include a lot of useful informations.i join this blog i couldnt see unnecessary arguments and it makes us happy thnx all moderator n editors.

  25. This is a quarterly growth figure. It is standard practice in the United States to report growth data on an annual basis.

  26. While I’m not a big fan of IE I can see how Microsoft is actively trying to make it better and the next version looks amazing! Well done to you and your team Chris!

Skip to main content