<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Firefox 1.5 Beta 2 Released</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pthree.org/2005/10/08/firefox-15-beta-2-released/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pthree.org/2005/10/08/firefox-15-beta-2-released/</link>
	<description>Linux.  GNU.  Freedom.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Jun 2013 17:06:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.6-beta3-24432</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: FP</title>
		<link>http://pthree.org/2005/10/08/firefox-15-beta-2-released/#comment-2</link>
		<dc:creator>FP</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2005 10:48:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pthree.org:8080/2005/10/08/firefox-15-beta-2-released/#comment-2</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&gt; There is no reason why Firefox cannot fully support CSS Level 2 properly

You do realise CSS 2.1 is currently a moving target right? One reason no browser could have passed Acid2 straight off is that it relied on non-public CSS spec changes (those changes were published in June causing CSS 2.1 to go back to working draft status).

&gt; I guess making rendering engines for browsers standards compliant is a low priority.

Huh? Just look how much stuff has been added in the Gecko1.8, the reason no Acid2 fixes have been made is that the testcase came out after Gecko1.8 had hit beta, Gecko1.9 has already had several fixes (e.g. the eyes now show up).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt; There is no reason why Firefox cannot fully support CSS Level 2 properly</p>
<p>You do realise CSS 2.1 is currently a moving target right? One reason no browser could have passed Acid2 straight off is that it relied on non-public CSS spec changes (those changes were published in June causing CSS 2.1 to go back to working draft status).</p>
<p>&gt; I guess making rendering engines for browsers standards compliant is a low priority.</p>
<p>Huh? Just look how much stuff has been added in the Gecko1.8, the reason no Acid2 fixes have been made is that the testcase came out after Gecko1.8 had hit beta, Gecko1.9 has already had several fixes (e.g. the eyes now show up).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
