Blog Comments Back Up


The blog platform migration is now complete and the blog and comments are working as usual. If you notice any problems or want to comment on the new platform, please use this post to do so. Thanks for your patience. And now back your regularly scheduled programming…

Comments (35)

  1. hAl says:

    I suggest you give the IEblog account an IE logo avatar.

    The W3C markup validation on this new blog pages seem even worse than the old one.

    Is this some bug?

  2. Jesper says:

    From rcf 4287:

    "When an Atom Document is relocated, migrated, syndicated, republished, exported, or imported, the content of its atom:id element MUST NOT change."

    This includes upgrading your blogging platform.

  3. IE <3 says:

    Ohh… wow… Have you considered migration to WordPress? 😀

  4. Josh says:

    Nice. It's a shame that the blog's theme wasn't changed as well.

  5. boen_robot says:

    I was really hoping that the update would also mean your blog finally having valid markup. Too bad that's not the case. Normal validation shows "2027 Errors, 24 warning(s)", while the "best case scenario" (i.e. one with least errors) – HTML 4.01 Transitional – shows "199 Errors, 104 warning(s) ".

    IE team, if you haven't already, can't you explicitly ask the blog platform maintainers for valid (X)HTML code to be part of the next update? And if you have, could you remind them?

  6. Klimax says:

    Apparently tags like <CSControl:Placeholder> are causing many of those validation errors. Seems like they are not stripped from final HTML.

  7. Phil (an other one) says:

    Does it really matter about valid markup on here people, really?  Really?  Big deal.  Does it render ok?  The answer is yes.  So get over it.

  8. SeanJenkin says:

    We are taking a look at the CSControl issue. We're listening…

  9. Thomas Tallyce says:

    Why on earth has the URL changed with a /b/ now in it?

  10. Chris says:

    It's a shame each comment no longer has a unique link to it, which made it easy keeping up when a particular blog entry had a lot of responses.

  11. Michael A. Puls II says:

    Ending up getting duplicate feed messages after the change in my feed client. Probably caused by an atom:id change as Jesper suggests. Although it wasn't difficult to clean up, it was quite annoying.

  12. Klimax says:

    @Chris:

    It appears (based upun Comments feed) that post might have uniq link,but it just doesn't have anchors in html.

    Link from feed for your comment is blogs.msdn.com/…/blog-comments-back-up.aspx

  13. ieblog says:

    @hal – we added an IE avatar image (the ie logo.)  We are still experimenting a bit with where we really want the avatar images to appear.  For the moment they should be appearing only in the comments section.

    @Chris – thanks for pointing that out.  We are looking into it and hope we can get the individual comment links back.  We aren't sure yet.

    We also moved the comment submission form to below the current comments.  

  14. Roman says:

    boen_robot: at least it doesn't declare the Frameset doctype anymore…

  15. Moo0z0r says:

    As a continuation of my cynical series of posts, I'd like to report that comment posting is putridly slow.

  16. Mitch 74 says:

    Oh great – yet another site created with Adobe's CS defaults.

    – don't use XHTML Transitional if all you're outputting is HTML! Use HTML 4.01 Strict DOCTYPE and 1,200 validation errors just go away.

    – when using HTML, remove all xmlns parameters and shorttags (' />'). Save bytes.

    – in ALL CASES, you must encode the ampersands '&': CS doesn't do it for you (yes, it's stupid – you more than anybody else must know how dangerous a badly declared entity is)

    – content generator markers must be kept inside comments – or not appear at all.

  17. twpol says:

    The replacement of the pagination widget with more comments after the page loads is really, really annoying – it is completely trashing any hope of the browser remembering the scroll position I was last at if I reload (if it was beyond comment 15, the last on page 1). 🙁

  18. steve says:

    Thanks for removing the requirement to sign in. The signin system wasn't hooked up correctly and would not let you associate an existing MS login with this site.

    Wow for a new site there sure is a lot of trash in the source! e.g. this site has almost no styling yet there are hundreds of extremely verbose class names scattered across the code.

    20 JavaScript files and

    19 Stylesheets

    No gzipping on images or stylesheets

    and no CDN

    Woot! way to optimize for performance!

  19. Phil (an other one) says:

    @Moo0z0r – no it's not.  Trade in your 56k modem for broadband.

  20. Hani says:

    its slower than before

  21. Chris says:

    @ieblog:

    It would be great if each comment could have a unique link back to it like before, as not only for keeping track, but for when great comments are added and referenced to via other sources (blogs, forums, etc).

    Also, the comments feed link seems to be for all comments, rather than each blog entry. To subscribe to the comment feed for each blog entry, I had to use the feed icon in the browser to find it in that long list of options. Could a second link be added to each blog entry for comments related to only that subject?

  22. George Carlin says:

    All you people complaining about performance and wasteful code–I have the solution, so listen up:

    1.) Get a faster computer…

    2.) Get a faster Internet Connection…

    3.) Don't you know this has been the Redmond answer for decades now?

    4.) It's your fault, not theirs (but they're listening!).

    😉 😉 😉

  23. Saitir says:

    When I try to subscribe to the IE Blog feed (using IE8) I get the error:

    "Internet Explorer cannot display this feed

     Internet Explorer does not support feeds with DTDs."

    Nice to know MS has abandoned dogfooding…

  24. @Phil

    Validity is important, especially for any company creating HTML rendering engines, browsers, mobile web phones, WYSIWYG HTML editors and claiming to be web standards compliant. Validity is a necessary minimum. Validity is not a luxury. Validity should not be a feature, or some kind of webpage decoration or a flavor-of-the-month.

    Many people have said and continue to say: "If Microsoft does not even validate its markup code in all of its websites, then why should I?" or "If Microsoft never did validate the markup code in all of its websites, why should I?"

    And yes, the rendering is not OK. The normal font-size is now definitely under 13px when the browser default font-size for unstyled body text is 16px in all browsers. Why change this? Why decrease the font-size? Why make it harder to read?

    The textarea to edit comments is ridiculously small, clearly anti-user.

    Microsoft should use the best coding practices, not the worse practices, not miserable coding practices, not bloated code (like 20 JavaScript files and 19 Stylesheets), not hundreds and hundreds of validation markup errors in a blog about its browser, not millions of validation markup errors in all of its websites fully under its control in the last 15 years. It's irrelevant whether we are speaking of HTML 4.01 with strict DTD or HTML5 or HTML6. A webpage should not contain HTML errors when it's labelled "Microsoft" or any other web-related corporation brand names.

    Microsoft should use the best coding practices at all times, in its websites, in its products, books, conferences, blogs, etc.. What is so difficult to understand here??

    Gérard

  25. The new blog definitely has huge problems:

    – utter divitis

    – utter classitis

    – many id attributes use more than 64 characters

    – utter bloated code

    – like I said, the textarea is ridiculously small: it's set to have/show 2 rows and 20 characters wide: <textarea name="ctl00$content$ctl00$fragment_5069$ctl01$ctl00$ctl00$ctl05$bpCommentForm$ctl05$tbComment" rows="2" cols="20" id="ctl00_content_ctl00_fragment_5069_ctl01_ctl00_ctl00_ctl05_bpCommentForm_ctl05_tbComment" style="height:100px;"></textarea>

    – some id attributes simply defy imagination: e.g.

    <div class="footer-fragment omniture-footer-fragment" id="fragment-63dbeaa2-1743-491a-8213-0ba60bd457b8">

    – font-size has been set to 12px, just like that, whether it helps the user or not, like-it-or-not.

    – on top of all of the declared stylesheets, there are many inline style declarations

    – the stylesheets (eg blogs.msdn.com/…/base.css ) overdeclare, overdefine, over-excessively overcode almost everything: so everything is in place for over-excessively-constrained page layouts

    To me, all of the reasons (usability, code reduction, code maintenance, separation of style and content, accessibility, forward-compatibility, etc) to use CSS that I could think of are defeated in that blog.

    Gérard

  26. RobertWrayUK says:

    Gérard, the new blog has huge problems? It *looks* OK on my screen! The comment box is a little small, but for someone who's as, um, verbose as you I can understand the complaint 😉

    Whilst I don't disagree with any of the comments you've made about divits, classitis, bloat, etc,… Ultimately Microsoft have used an "off-the-shelf" product to power blogs.msdn.com so most (I'm not going to say any, as there'll surely be some issues that are down to configuration / addons) issues will be the fault of the off-the-shelf-product.

    Oooh, I got to this line of my comment and the comment textarea automatically expanded for me, looks like the size of it is less of a problem!

    I'd, personally, much rather Microsoft spend their time and money making Internet Explorer a first class browser, than devoting a single penny/cent(*insert small coin of your choice here) to make the markup "nicer"/more standards compliant/etc. Anything that impacts on usability of the site, such as comment pagination, or accessibility (and yes, I'm well aware that cleaner markup can make for a better accessibility experience) should be taken care of. But, like I said, the page loads, I can read the content, job done!…

    Plus – if you're going to complain anywhere try blogs.msdn.com/…/seanjenkin .. The IE team build a browser, not this blogging platform.

  27. > It *looks* OK on my screen!

    The nr 1 problem (fallacy) with amateur web author and with the web in general is that they assume that what they see on their monitor screen is what others/visitors will get. It isn't the case and it shouldn't be the case. We all have/use different operating systems (or versions), browsers (or versions), configurations, connexion speed, various monitor, screen resolutions, eye vision, use font types, with javascript support disabled or not, with flash support disabled or not, etc.

    > The comment box is a little small

    Microsoft created this blog in order to get feedback. 2 rows and 20 cols is what was coded by Microsoft. No one else made that decision.

    > Ultimately Microsoft have used an "off-the-shelf" product to power blogs.msdn.com so most (I'm not going to say any, as there'll surely be some issues that are down to configuration / addons) issues will be the fault of the off-the-shelf-product.

    This is an extremely weak argument. Microsoft chose such "off-the-shelf" product. No one else. So who should be blamed for such decision?

    A professional plumber never criticizes anyone else for choosing his tools, making/creating his implementation, making his decisions. A professional plumber tries to improve his decisions by learning from his mistakes, tries to refine his methods and techniques with time, trials and errors, his overall decision making and managerial skills. With Microsoft, it takes years or over a decade to finally see improvements and corrections in areas for which they are ultimately the sole responsible to begin with.

    > the comment textarea automatically expanded for me, looks like the size of it is less of a problem

    It is not necessarly what is happening with any/all web browsers (with overall good web-standards-compliance) which can be used. I always use a recent browser version and one which passes acid2 test.

    > I'd, personally, much rather Microsoft spend their time and money making Internet Explorer a first class browser

    Microsoft is not just a browser manufacturer. It also creates and sell WYSIWYG HTML editors. It creates web development websites (MSDN) lecturing/tutorializing on how to create good websites. Microsoft have created, released all sorts of web-related tools, web-related documentation, web-related softwares for at least the last 15 years.

    When it comes to creating new webpages, new websites with bloated code, with invalid markup code, Microsoft has to be the worse offender of all web softwares company. Microsoft should lead by practicing and honoring the web-standards-compliance they claim about their browser software. It's about being coherent, consequent and practicing what you promote/claim to begin with. It should not take 15 years to understand that.

    Gérard

  28. average Joe says:

    And yet Microsoft thinks that we will believe that they are IN for HTML 5 and the same markup goal…..

    MICROSOFT, YOU NEED TO ACT. AND YOU NEED TO ACT ON ALL POSSIBLE WAYS YOU CAN, EVEN THE SMALLER ONES.

    Look ao Mozilla and Opera: they have valid markup code on near all their webpages.

    Also, MOZILLA AND OPERA ACTIVELY FIX COMPLAINTS ABOUT THEIR BLOG PLATFORMS, even if MOZILLA AND OPERA probably have less visitors and less money than you MICROSOFT, but still they show to care MORE about their users.

    Really Microsoft, have a look here:

    my.opera.com/…/blog

    http://blog.mozilla.com/

    They might not be perfect, but they are way better than you, again JUST*LIKE*THEY*ARE*ON*THEIR*BROWSERS*ATM.

    MICROSOFT, stop talking and ACT!

    ACT, ACT, ACT, ACT!

  29. RobertWrayUK says:

    @Gérard – it's a good job I'm not an amateur then! 🙂

    My point was, quite simply, there are more important things for Microsoft to focus on – in my opinion – than ensuring that the markup on one of their blog sites is "perfect". Like IE9.

  30. Martin says:

    Why are most images (Mostly the avatars) sent with

    Cache-Control: no-cache

    Pragma: no-cache

    It make loading the blog much slower then needed.

  31. > My point was, quite simply, there are more important things for Microsoft to focus on – in my opinion –

    This is what we were told in 2000, then in 2004, then in 2006. 6 years after starting this blog and 2 weeks after being told about "rolling out a platform update to all MSDN and Technet blogs", we are being told that now "The blog platform migration is now complete". They obviously didn't listen. They did not even try to be coherent or decently professional.

    > than ensuring that the markup on one of their blog sites is "perfect". Like IE9.

    Who talked about perfection here? There is no perfection at other's web browser manufacturers websites. But at least they try not to look utterly incoherent, inconsequent and non-professional.

    validator.w3.org/check

    today reports 355 errors while using a transitional DTD

    Microsoft probably never even tried to look reasonable, decent or respectable in terms of validation markup errors, valid markup code, bloated CSS code, divitis, classitis, etc. in the last 15 years in any of the websites under its full control.

    What exactly is preventing Microsoft from working on IE9 and on upgrading coding techniques for new webpages fully under the control of Microsoft? What is exactly preventing Microsoft from correcting the documentation errors, the bad coding practices, wrong examples, invalid markup code in all of MSDN webpages (and in examples of webpage building) regarding web development and web standards compliance?

    You obviously do not understand my perspective. I would never want to deal with a corrupted police officer accepting bribes, a lung doctor smoking cigarettes in my face, an overweighted nutritionist/dietician eating all the time greasy-trans-fat-fast-food or an incompetent plumber who never stops bringing lame excuses about the tools he uses.

    When it comes to creating new webpages, new websites with bloated code, with hundreds and thousands of markup errors, Microsoft is the worse.

    Gérard

  32. Neil Dunensach says:

    @Gerard – it's a blog.  Not a customer ordering site.  Not a vendor order site.  Not financial.  A BLOG.  IT-DOESN'T-MATTER.

    For Hotmail, or microsoft.com etc then yes it does.  Big time.  But not here.

  33. RobertWrayUK says:

    @Neil Dunensach – You've summed up my opinion quite succinctly 🙂

    @Gérard – Without being too blunt, chill out. Maybe just a little? 🙂

  34. average Joe says:

    One more issue to report on this new IE blog:

    POSTING big posts on FIREFOX doesn't work!

  35. Eric says:

    "Average", please troll elsewhere. Thank you.