The most important thing about HTML5 is ? What a weird statement.
Making Flash obsolete is pretty important
Video doesn't kill the flash star.
W3C declares HTML5 standard complete
31–40 of 82 posts
Re: W3C declares HTML5 standard complete
#32I'm hoping for a scene graph standard for HTML6 and a spec that allows multiple documents per window (which themselves could be nodes on a scene graph) instead of the one document per window.
HTML5 is a living standard, no? There isn't going to be an "HTML6".
The spec published by WHATWG is a living standard, and is just called "HTML". The expectation is that every so often the W3C will pick a revision of the WHATWG's HTML spec and stamp it with a version number.
Re: W3C declares HTML5 standard complete
#33I'm hoping for a scene graph standard for HTML6 and a spec that allows multiple documents per window (which themselves could be nodes on a scene graph) instead of the one document per window.
HTML5 is a living standard, no? There isn't going to be an "HTML6".
Well, this announcement seems to indicate that from W3C's point of view, it's not living anymore. They've finalized the standard, and are starting work on HTML 5.1. WHATWG apparently no longer numbers their standard. [1]
Re: W3C declares HTML5 standard complete
#34Does anyone know how is Doctype versioning going to work with W3Cs snapshoting of the living standard? Or are browsers just going to ignore W3C and stick to implementing WHATWGs spec?
> Or are browsers just going to ignore W3C and stick to implementing WHATWGs spec?
Well, do you think browser vendors will just stop implementing new features because the W3C decides that HTML 5 finished?
Re: W3C declares HTML5 standard complete
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
HTML5 is a living standard, no? There isn't going to be an "HTML6".
The spec published by WHATWG is a living standard, and is just called "HTML". The expectation is that every so often the W3C will pick a revision of the WHATWG's HTML spec and stamp it with a version number.
Note the SVN revision the REC is based on is almost a year old.
Re: W3C declares HTML5 standard complete
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Now, IE9+, Firefox, Chrome, and Safari are all basically guaranteed to look at the same page in the same way, and the "toolsmith" parsers like Gumbo or html5lib are all rapidly converging on the standard. So it's finally possible to see a page the way a browser sees it. The web projects I have to take part on, are a distant reality from that description.
Is there any particular reason? Requiring support for older or legacy browsers? I just recently wrapped up a project utilizing customized Twitter Bootstrap / CSS3 / HTML5 and I was pleasantly surprised at how smooth everything went between IE/Chrome/Safari/FF. This is the first time, in a long time, that everything just "worked."
Bootstrap deals with a lot of cross browser issues.
Re: W3C declares HTML5 standard complete
#37This CNet article seems to have a lot more detail than the Techcrunch one:
http://www.cnet.com/news/html5-is-done-but-two-groups-still-...
Re: W3C declares HTML5 standard complete
#38The other huge accomplishment of HTML5 is completely standardizing many fundamental parts of the web that previously were a mess of browser incompatibilities. 6 years ago, if you wanted to parse HTML, you might reach for BeautifulSoup, or libxml, or Hpricot, or Nokogiri...and they would all be subtly different in the parse tree they produced. And they couldn't do any better, because if you viewed the page in IE, or F…
> Now, IE9+, Firefox, Chrome, and Safari are all basically guaranteed to look at the same page in the same way, and the "toolsmith" parsers like Gumbo or html5lib are all rapidly converging on the standard. So it's finally possible to see a page the way a browser sees it. The web projects I have to take part on, are a distant reality from that description.
Are you talking about inconsistent HTML parsing or inconsistent CSS rendering? The latter is much more of a pita than the former.
Re: W3C declares HTML5 standard complete
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there any particular reason? Requiring support for older or legacy browsers? I just recently wrapped up a project utilizing customized Twitter Bootstrap / CSS3 / HTML5 and I was pleasantly surprised at how smooth everything went between IE/Chrome/Safari/FF. This is the first time, in a long time, that everything just "worked."
Bootstrap deals with a lot of cross browser issues.
Yes and no, it depends, If you use the entire suite of bootstrap, yes. We did not, we used it for the grid system (getting those nice big perfectly sized columns). Everything else was hand written CSS and HTML.
Re: W3C declares HTML5 standard complete
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Now, IE9+, Firefox, Chrome, and Safari are all basically guaranteed to look at the same page in the same way, and the "toolsmith" parsers like Gumbo or html5lib are all rapidly converging on the standard. So it's finally possible to see a page the way a browser sees it. The web projects I have to take part on, are a distant reality from that description.
Are you talking about inconsistent HTML parsing or inconsistent CSS rendering? The latter is much more of a pita than the former.
If you stick to the basics of CSS that have been around for a decade or so, both of them are basically solved problems. Browsers are remarkably uniform in how they handle the stuff that was a PITA in 2008.
The problem is that expectations adjust too, and now we want all these new HTML5 features that were just pioneered in a single browser a couple years ago. Those have a lot of cross-browser issues.