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

HTML6 Concept

html6spec.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 89 posts

Re: HTML6 Concept

#41

Post by lmm »

arcatek wrote: post #7

I think the title (and domain name) are a bit misleading: that's not HTML6, because it doesn't appear to be endorsed by anything related to the web standards (Mozilla, W3C, etc). That's MyHTML, sure, but not really HTML6. Funnily enough, at a first glance it looked like a real proposal, then I looked again and it appeared as a joke (I mean ... and are a bit satirical), and then I looked the repo and there's enough is…

> I think the title (and domain name) are a bit misleading: that's not HTML6, because it doesn't appear to be endorsed by anything related to the web standards (Mozilla, W3C, etc). That's MyHTML, sure, but not really HTML6.

HTML5 was exactly that; just a bunch of implementors (WhatWG) until the W3C eventually endorsed it.

Re: HTML6 Concept

#42

Post by danielsamuels »

dkopi wrote: post #9

I simply can't imagine anyone wanting to adopt this. It seems like a lot of effort was put into the concept, and there are some great suggestions, but the added bloat goes against adopting the proposed solution.

Too much writing, not enough thinking.

Re: HTML6 Concept

#43

Post by Havvy »

lmm wrote: post #41
arcatek wrote: post #7

I think the title (and domain name) are a bit misleading: that's not HTML6, because it doesn't appear to be endorsed by anything related to the web standards (Mozilla, W3C, etc). That's MyHTML, sure, but not really HTML6. Funnily enough, at a first glance it looked like a real proposal, then I looked again and it appeared as a joke (I mean ... and are a bit satirical), and then I looked the repo and there's enough is…

> I think the title (and domain name) are a bit misleading: that's not HTML6, because it doesn't appear to be endorsed by anything related to the web standards (Mozilla, W3C, etc). That's MyHTML, sure, but not really HTML6. HTML5 was exactly that; just a bunch of implementors (WhatWG) until the W3C eventually endorsed it.

Except WHATWG is made of many of the same members as the W3C.

Re: HTML6 Concept

#44

Post by inikulin »

swalsh wrote: post #11

There's only one thing I want in my future web client, and that's to not have to use javascript. Dart, or compilation in general is not quite the savior i'm hoping for... I want to be able to write C#, or Ruby, or python, and reference it on a page, and for it to run. Gosh that would be great. I wouldn't even mind if its a very limited version of the language. Edit: confused why i'm downvoted... hmmm

> I want to be able to write C#, or Ruby, or python, and reference it on a page, and for it to run.

Throwing back huge front-end stack fragmentation, insanely increased complexity of the browsers that you want to achieve with this approach? Statements like "I don't understand var scope in JS", "This prototype thing doesn't work", "JS is completely broken because [] == false" doesn't count, ok?

Re: HTML6 Concept

#45

Post by danschumann »

To achieve what the poster wants, wouldn't it be better to

  
    
       Keep the stuff we already have 
      
        And just make id and class syntax better?
        
         1
I don't see them removing the way html works, but I could see adding in a way to do classes easier.

Re: HTML6 Concept

#47

Post by ssmoot »

IgorPartola wrote: post #37

Some good ideas here but some terrible ones as well. First, is terrible. We don't need namespaces in HTML (or in XML for that matter, but that's a different story). would be sufficient. Even better, something like this: I do like the idea of not having generic 's everywhere. You can already do this with, for example, Angular. Basically, aside from the pre-defined elements (div, span, input, etc.) I want to just use w…

What's wrong with namespaces in your opinion?

Re: HTML6 Concept

#48

Post by Havvy »

swalsh wrote: post #11

There's only one thing I want in my future web client, and that's to not have to use javascript. Dart, or compilation in general is not quite the savior i'm hoping for... I want to be able to write C#, or Ruby, or python, and reference it on a page, and for it to run. Gosh that would be great. I wouldn't even mind if its a very limited version of the language. Edit: confused why i'm downvoted... hmmm

Because it has nothing at all to do with the article.

Re: HTML6 Concept

#49

Post by YoAdrian »

IgorPartola wrote: post #37

Some good ideas here but some terrible ones as well. First, is terrible. We don't need namespaces in HTML (or in XML for that matter, but that's a different story). would be sufficient. Even better, something like this: I do like the idea of not having generic 's everywhere. You can already do this with, for example, Angular. Basically, aside from the pre-defined elements (div, span, input, etc.) I want to just use w…

I think you want .

http://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/responsive/picture-el...

Post reply on HN