<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.technet.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Some Quirks With IE8</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/notesfromthefield/archive/2009/03/24/some-quirks-with-ie8.aspx</link><description>Today, checking my email via Outlook Web Access, I noticed a difference in how graphic inserts are handled in the email viewing window. Say you insert a link to a picture in your email from a public unencrypted web site. When you open the message in OWA</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)</generator><item><title>re: Some Quirks With IE8</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/notesfromthefield/archive/2009/03/24/some-quirks-with-ie8.aspx#3217507</link><pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 23:38:17 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:3217507</guid><dc:creator>Aaron Margosis</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;I for one like the change a lot. &amp;nbsp;The old default didn’t say &amp;quot;it's OK to remove the protection from the pictures that don’t really need protection.&amp;quot; &amp;nbsp;It said, &amp;quot;Forget about securing this channel anymore – it really doesn’t matter.&amp;quot; &amp;nbsp;In the short term it might mess up some sites (like &lt;a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="https://www.verizonwireless.com/"&gt;https://www.verizonwireless.com/&lt;/a&gt;) but hopefully it will drive good behavior.&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item></channel></rss>