91–100 of 104 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Clickable: http://rclayton.net I think it's very elegantly done. Kudos.
Yeah, Chrome doesn't like this site. Which is a shame - when I opened it in Firefox I was impressed, but if I had not been prompted to check it out by the comments on this thread I would have moved on...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Javascript's onscroll event is a wonderful tool. It's one of the best ways to leverage an extremely common and expected interaction pattern (scrolling down a web page) to do interesting and unexpected things. I used it to create a sort of paginated-persistent-bookmark navigation for my new portfolio site earlier this year (in profile, if you're curious).
Clickable: http://rclayton.net I think it's very elegantly done. Kudos.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately, it does when language is used to denote specific technologies.
No, it doe not, even then. It’s unfortunately not that simple. HTML5 has acquired new meaning, its definition has changed.
That is categorically untrue. There is a W3C specification which defines exactly what HTML5 is (or more correctly will become).
The specification is a proposal, but this still doesn't mean that the term 'HTML5' is able to acquire new meaning.
This is because it's technical shorthand used to describe a group of technologies - and the group of technologies it represents can be specified precisely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it doe not, even then. It’s unfortunately not that simple. HTML5 has acquired new meaning, its definition has changed.
HTML5 has acquired new meaning, its definition has changed That is categorically untrue. There is a W3C specification which defines exactly what HTML5 is (or more correctly will become ). The specification is a proposal, but this still doesn't mean that the term 'HTML5' is able to acquire new meaning. This is because it's technical shorthand used to describe a group of technologies - and the group of technologies it…
If most people use HTML5 to refer to all new and upcoming web technologies the meaning changes. One person using it that way is an error, nearly everyone using it that way changes the meaning. You can’t impose definitions top-down.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
HTML5 has acquired new meaning, its definition has changed That is categorically untrue. There is a W3C specification which defines exactly what HTML5 is (or more correctly will become ). The specification is a proposal, but this still doesn't mean that the term 'HTML5' is able to acquire new meaning. This is because it's technical shorthand used to describe a group of technologies - and the group of technologies it…
That’s not how it works. If most people use HTML5 to refer to all new and upcoming web technologies the meaning changes. One person using it that way is an error, nearly everyone using it that way changes the meaning. You can’t impose definitions top-down.
While I agree with this concept - I don't think misuse of technical terms changes the meaning of those terms.
In this case, lack of education, misinformation and confusion are driving the misuse of the term. It won't change what HTML5 actually is, because we have an officially sanctioned definition.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s not how it works. If most people use HTML5 to refer to all new and upcoming web technologies the meaning changes. One person using it that way is an error, nearly everyone using it that way changes the meaning. You can’t impose definitions top-down.
I know what you're trying to say - language is a fluid changing thing, which evolves. While I agree with this concept - I don't think misuse of technical terms changes the meaning of those terms. In this case, lack of education, misinformation and confusion are driving the misuse of the term. It won't change what HTML5 actually is, because we have an officially sanctioned definition.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know what you're trying to say - language is a fluid changing thing, which evolves. While I agree with this concept - I don't think misuse of technical terms changes the meaning of those terms. In this case, lack of education, misinformation and confusion are driving the misuse of the term. It won't change what HTML5 actually is, because we have an officially sanctioned definition.
HTML5 has become a very relevant term outside of technical circles and there it refers to all upcoming web technologies and – pretty much – always has. I guess you will just have to life with the two different meanings in two different context. I don’t think it’s a problem, I quite like HTML5 as a catch-all term for upcoming web technologies.
HTML5 hasn't always referred to all upcoming web technologies. It's misuse is recent - and I think Steve Jobs has encouraged the change.
I find being asked for an 'HTML5' website problematic; a lot of clients use the term simply because they understand it's a buzz word - and don't actually know what they're asking for.
I think we'll have to disagree.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's really depressing seeing HN use HTML5 as incorrectly as my managers...
I blame Steve Jobs; I honestly do. EDIT: I believe Steve Jobs is largely responsible for popularising the idea of HTML5 as a Flash replacement. He's also popularised the idea that HTML5 is technology that can be used now, when the situation is actually a lot more complicated. I think that without Steve's input, HTML5 wouldn't have reached the wider public's consciousness in the way it has - and there'd be far less mi…