11–20 of 188 posts
https://www.w3.org/TR/html52/changes.html#changes
For those who have not been paying attention for a decade, what's the relationship between this revision and WHATWG?
tl;dr: Ignore w3c's HTML "standards" as they are (often poor) copies of WHATWG's standards.
For the lazy and/or those unable find the link in the massively oversized index; [0] Changes listed here [0]: https://www.w3.org/TR/html52/changes.html#changes
thght noreferrer value was already a standard.
https://www.w3.org/TR/html52/changes.html#changes
For those who have not been paying attention for a decade, what's the relationship between this revision and WHATWG?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
thght noreferrer value was already a standard.
It is. W3C HTML5 standards are merely following/copying what WHATWG and the browser makers are doing, with little actual relevance.
https://www.w3.org/TR/html52/changes.html#changes
For those who have not been paying attention for a decade, what's the relationship between this revision and WHATWG?
W3C is supposed to be properly supported everywhere.
What's the point of removing features such as "menu" from HTML standard? If there are browsers supporting it and webpages using it, would Mozilla (or Google or Microsoft) actually remove those features just because newest standard said so? I mean: marquee was deprecated long ago, yet browsers still render it correctly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For those who have not been paying attention for a decade, what's the relationship between this revision and WHATWG?
Full story here: https://www.reddit.com/r/javascript/comments/5swe9b/what_is_... tl;dr: Ignore w3c's HTML "standards" as they are (often poor) copies of WHATWG's standards.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For those who have not been paying attention for a decade, what's the relationship between this revision and WHATWG?
The WHATWG is for browser vendors. It's in a constant state of flux as new changes get proposed and those proposals get changed through implementation. The W3C is for web authors. It presents a more stable recommendation and provides advice (based on research) for authors.
> The W3C is for web authors. It presents a more stable recommendation and provides advice (based on research) for authors.
Web authors usually use MDN instead, because it serves that purpose in a much better way. (Note that despite the name MDN is not Mozilla specific but a cross-browser resource, and that Microsoft and Google recently joined MDN.)
> The WHATWG is for browser vendors. It's in a constant state of flux as new changes get proposed and those proposals get changed through implementation.
The W3C recommendation is no different in that regard, they also describe stuff that's not fully implemented in all browsers yet. But the WHATWG version is more up to date, so you'll notice much earlier that the new feature you want to depend on will be abandoned or changed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Full story here: https://www.reddit.com/r/javascript/comments/5swe9b/what_is_... tl;dr: Ignore w3c's HTML "standards" as they are (often poor) copies of WHATWG's standards.
Domenic Denicola posted similar thoughts on Stackoverflow as well: https://stackoverflow.com/a/43082734/4200039