Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple & HTML5

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 137 posts

Re: Apple & HTML5

#31

Post by noibl »

ellyagg wrote: post #27
bradgessler wrote: post #3

Neat idea, very poor implementation. If you try to view the examples in Google Chrome, you'll get a notice that you have to download Safari ( http://skitch.com/bradgessler/dgw7p/apple-html5 ) This sets a very poor example for Apple supporting standards.

> This sets a very poor example for Apple supporting standards. Can you, or any of the dozens of upvoters, explain the logic behind that criticism? It literally seems to make no sense to me, so I must be missing something. The page talks about emerging web standards and talks about Safari and Apple's support for them. It mentions that not all browsers support all of the latest standards, and then it gives examples of…

> The page talks about emerging web standards and talks about Safari and Apple's support for them.

It doesn't say 'emerging'. It says 'reliable'.

> It mentions that not all browsers support all of the latest standards, and then it gives examples of some of the latest standards that Safari supports.

Except that it doesn't. (a) because the specs are still in draft, and (b) because independent tests show Safari's support to be impressive but nowhere near complete.

http://www.freeciv.net/yet-another-html5-browser-test/

Re: Apple & HTML5

#33

Post by bradgessler »

ellyagg wrote: post #27
bradgessler wrote: post #3

Neat idea, very poor implementation. If you try to view the examples in Google Chrome, you'll get a notice that you have to download Safari ( http://skitch.com/bradgessler/dgw7p/apple-html5 ) This sets a very poor example for Apple supporting standards.

> This sets a very poor example for Apple supporting standards. Can you, or any of the dozens of upvoters, explain the logic behind that criticism? It literally seems to make no sense to me, so I must be missing something. The page talks about emerging web standards and talks about Safari and Apple's support for them. It mentions that not all browsers support all of the latest standards, and then it gives examples of…

A poignant example is all of the non-standard -webkit CSS extensions Apple uses for the Gallery demo (http://www.apple.com/html5/showcase/gallery/):

   #gallery-demo .grid2d figure:nth-child(5)  { -webkit-transform: translateX(-241px) translateY(-3px) scale(.45) translateZ(1000px);}
If you accept -webkit CSS extensions as a standard, then Internet Explorer has supported the CSS opacity attribute for years:

   filter: progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.Alpha(Opacity=80);
These extensions are not part of the CSS3 or HTML5 spec.

Re: Apple & HTML5

#35

Post by jsz0 »

tumult wrote: post #15
bradgessler wrote: post #3

Neat idea, very poor implementation. If you try to view the examples in Google Chrome, you'll get a notice that you have to download Safari ( http://skitch.com/bradgessler/dgw7p/apple-html5 ) This sets a very poor example for Apple supporting standards.

Some of the demos only work in Safari. Even a nightly Chromium snapshot does not support everything that Safari does. I ran Chromium with my user agent set to Safari. And here's where it gets interesting. The demos that don't work in Chromium, notably the ones that require CSS 3D transforms, get removed from the listings on the pages that have them. So for example, the "Transitions" page, only the Dissolve, Toss, Sli…

http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=18125

"The upstream work is not sufficient for what we will need. It is only the beginning of the work. We would need to offload compositing to the GPU."

Sounds like Apple decided to enable the existing WebKit implementation while Google is working on their own implementation. (which could very well end up back into WebKit proper at some point) This is exactly how standards in the context of friendly competition are supposed to work. You can't really expect everyone working off WebKit code to coordinate when certain features or standards support are turned on in beta or public releases.

Re: Apple & HTML5

#36

Post by buster »

buster wrote: post #12
bradgessler wrote: post #3

Neat idea, very poor implementation. If you try to view the examples in Google Chrome, you'll get a notice that you have to download Safari ( http://skitch.com/bradgessler/dgw7p/apple-html5 ) This sets a very poor example for Apple supporting standards.

So much for "standard". I wouldn't have expected understanding of "open" from this company, anyway. Yesterday Flash was bad, but today it's fine to write websites that only work in Safari, while using some Apple-specific HTML/CSS-tags.

It's funny how many comments with the same opinion here get downvoted but no explanations why it's fine to add your own extensions to HTML/CSS (hello good old IE days). At least make your statements when downvoting so many people.

Re: Apple & HTML5

#37

Post by Zev »

jsz0 wrote: post #29
ube wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since both chrome and safari use webkit to render - chrome should work too shouldn't it? Granted - Apple's definition of open is "you should only use Apple products".

Nope. Google uses a ton of WebKit code, submits a lot of code back into WebKit proper, but they're doing their own stuff too. IIRC they wanted to have GPU acceleration for 3D CSS which apparently WebKit proper doesn't offer at this point or Google thinks they can do it better. You can't safely assume all WebKit based browsers are going to be equal.

WebKit proper doesn't offer at this point

I've got a radar open with Apple about Safari's performance (that I know WebKit people have at the very least seen) that essentially boils down to this reason.

Re: Apple & HTML5

#38

Post by buster »

ellyagg wrote: post #27
bradgessler wrote: post #3

Neat idea, very poor implementation. If you try to view the examples in Google Chrome, you'll get a notice that you have to download Safari ( http://skitch.com/bradgessler/dgw7p/apple-html5 ) This sets a very poor example for Apple supporting standards.

> This sets a very poor example for Apple supporting standards. Can you, or any of the dozens of upvoters, explain the logic behind that criticism? It literally seems to make no sense to me, so I must be missing something. The page talks about emerging web standards and talks about Safari and Apple's support for them. It mentions that not all browsers support all of the latest standards, and then it gives examples of…

It's no standard because apple developers extended Webkit with some additional tags but noone else. That's what makes it so sad. Even more sad is that they misuse the words HTML, CSS3, JS and standard to convince you of the oh-so-open world of Apple. MS did that for years and every web developer pays for that today. But somehow now it's ok.. You don't see how having to install Safari for Apples vision of the internet is the same vision that MS had when building their crappy extensions to the standard?

Re: Apple & HTML5

#40

Post by mikedouglas »

bradgessler wrote: post #33
ellyagg wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This sets a very poor example for Apple supporting standards. Can you, or any of the dozens of upvoters, explain the logic behind that criticism? It literally seems to make no sense to me, so I must be missing something. The page talks about emerging web standards and talks about Safari and Apple's support for them. It mentions that not all browsers support all of the latest standards, and then it gives examples of…

A poignant example is all of the non-standard -webkit CSS extensions Apple uses for the Gallery demo ( http://www.apple.com/html5/showcase/gallery/ ): #gallery-demo .grid2d figure:nth-child(5) { -webkit-transform: translateX(-241px) translateY(-3px) scale(.45) translateZ(1000px);} If you accept -webkit CSS extensions as a standard, then Internet Explorer has supported the CSS opacity attribute for years: filter: prog…

Actually, transform is in the CSS3 working spec[0]. Until the standard reaches the "Candidate Recommendation" stage, the W3C encourages browser vendors to use prefixes (-webkit, -moz, etc).

DXImageTransform.Microsoft.Alpha, on the other hand, wouldn't be part of CSS3, and uses its own specific syntax.

[0]: http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-3d-transforms/#transform-property

Post reply on HN