Originally posted by Mhtml
I imagine that Microsoft believes they are "above" the standards, and should set their own. . . I'm sure some people will share this opinion.
Mostly agree. But you have to consider the business case - it's arguably more important (commercially) to have a browser in which 99% of the world's websites work as expected, even the really crappy ones.
Unfortunately that creates a vicious circle - because IE supports crappy coding, people continue to do it, usually because they don't even know what's wrong with it; because they, like almost everyone else, use IE.
What you end up with is "de-facto" standards - what IE does is the de-facto standard. MS don't care how closely that conforms to the proscribed (w3c) standards - and why should they? The real benefit of standards compliance is interoperability - but as far as MS is concerned, progress is a timeline leading to the point where all architecture is MS; MS products have fantastic interoperability with other MS products, so MS don't give a rat's. Standards-compliance is like "well yeah, we 'll aim for it, but we have no qualms about abanding or reinterpreting it if it suits us".
It's quite dark really; but there you go. It's the world.