What is Digg?121 Comments
- inactive, on 09/13/2008, -1/+141Cool, I had no idea about the "canvas" element. Here's an example of it in use:
http://www.abrahamjoffe.com.au/ben/canvascape/
That's just amazing that it's not java or flash. Of course, what it needs is an IDE to compete with Flash. - Masna, on 09/14/2008, -2/+108"Some support for canvas is already in all the latest browsers except for IE."
Lol, surprise surprise.. - NathanCH, on 09/14/2008, -0/+37What? 2022? I can't wait that long.
- Pronation, on 09/14/2008, -1/+29That's pretty impressive... I can almost bunny hop.
- webresources, on 09/13/2008, -2/+27Current HTML is on of the oldest techs. used in the net.
Canvas element is great & SVG is too. - neko6, on 09/14/2008, -2/+22Its hated because it abuses its status as the "default" browser in the most common OS to promote bad practices, either using things outside standards or slow adaptation to new standards, its all the same.
- chadadams, on 09/14/2008, -1/+20That's easy, IE is the only browser I write "extra" code for.
Developer ranting aside, IE just isn't a "great" browser, it does it's job ok for many people (see high market share). It also gets a bit annoying with all the hold handing features. "Would you like to install this ActiveX control" and then prompt you again after authorizing the installation.
This kind of nonsense just isn't in Firefox, Chrome, Safari, Opera. And that's where the hate comes from, it's not a great browser but the freebie that comes with your PC. - inactive, on 09/14/2008, -1/+19I couldn't strafe very well though :-/
- gsnedders, on 09/14/2008, -0/+14More impressive: http://canvex.lazyilluminati.com/
- gamepr0, on 09/14/2008, -0/+14that is not just a canvas element, that's also processing.js
( http://ejohn.org/blog/processingjs/ )
a project that's still in development but it has alot of potential! - chadadams, on 09/14/2008, -5/+19It doesn't mean anything to have HTML 5 until we get the non-techies off IE 6 and 5.5. As a web designer I love HTML 5, but in the back of my head I KNOW these people won't give up there windows ME 200 machines for whatever reason, and then were in the same position we are now. It's not Microsoft's lack of standards I'm mad at when it comes to this, its the people who don't upgrade there boxes!
- Katana314, on 09/14/2008, -5/+17WOW, the graphics in this game SUCK...I'm cancelling my pre-order for HTML 5, I mean there are still plenty of 24-player HTML 4 servers going.
[/sarcasm] - Sabazou, on 09/14/2008, -4/+14http://www.ishtml5readyyet.com/
- talmand, on 09/14/2008, -1/+10Canvas is an interesting experiment but for it to be truly useful there will need to be some major speed improvements. Otherwise it'll be limited to just using it for interface purposes. Plus it can only truly present in the latest and greatest browsers with no ability to support older browsers. Canvas has a long hard road ahead of it.
Flash and Silverlight are so beyond just tossing vector graphics on the screen that you can't even compare the canvas tag with them - inactive, on 09/14/2008, -1/+9XHTML makes html into a scalable, efficient, and most importantly content-neutral platform.
HTML 5 adds a bunch of necessary features to HTML 4 but will result in even more complex parsers and less quality applications for the end user.
If HTML 5 can slowly be phased out in favor of XHTML 2 with the same capabilities then I see no problem. - NathanielJ, on 09/14/2008, -1/+8@positron - What the ***** are you talking about? The a/an thing has nothing to do with parts of speech or agreement. If the next word starts with a vowel sound, it should use "an" before it. It's no more complicated than that.
- Ransack, on 09/14/2008, -2/+9I used to do website design back in the 90s and was always frustrated by the poor implementation of standards and browser compatibility issues. 10 years later and we're still dealing with the same problems? For such an massive aspect of the Internet, why is it advancing at such a snails pace?
- NathanielJ, on 09/14/2008, -1/+8Does anyone have more information about how localized databases will work or why that's a part of a markup language?
- inactive, on 09/14/2008, -2/+9Teach me your ways.
- iSnooze, on 09/14/2008, -1/+7Wow, that is really impressive, thanks
- adverpart, on 09/14/2008, -2/+8Do you even know what XHTML is?
XHTML and HTML are the same thing, just with a miniscule difference in syntax. They have exactly the same elements, attributes, and features. If you want to store a document as XML, go for it. If you want to store it as HTML, go for it. The difference is trivial.
And yes, there's going to be an XML version of HTML 5, so you can have your cake and complain about it too. - jamshid, on 09/14/2008, -2/+7Why exactly is XHTML the way to go? Does anyone still believe XML will save the world, bring about software harmony?
There's lots of reasons not to use XHTML. It's by no means a certain replacement of nor successor to HTML. Some fair and balanced info:
http://www.webdevout.net/articles/beware-of-xhtml - ExRe, on 09/14/2008, -0/+5You know, if you have that hard of a time learning new features and you act as if it is a burden you should STOP and forget any career with any form of programming. If you have that attitude your code is going to be horrendous no matter how many years you practice.
- MikeSD34, on 09/14/2008, -0/+5@DiscoUnderpants:
Apple implemented the canvas element first. They implemented it so that their implementation of widgets (the dashboard) could be more flexible. It was only proposed as a standard and implemented by others after the fact.
The reason that Microsoft and Apple introduce these 3rd party extensions, even without having a proposed standard, is typically to enhance the features available to those who embed their rendering engines in applications on the desktop. The rendering engines for IE and Safari are used in all sorts of applications other than just browsers. In Apples case, it's Mail, iTunes, Dashboard, and others. These features aren't necessarily intended for the web at large when they're initially introduced.
One of the differences between Apple and Microsoft is how they choose to go about this. When Apple extends CSS with propriety vendor extensions, they do it in a way that it was intended to be done (using vendor extension prefixes -webkit-, something Microsoft will only start doing in IE8). The other difference being that Apple doesn't typically shirk the extensions proposed by others. Webkit has kept fairly up to date, including support for PNG and SVG far before Microsoft. - sadGuru, on 09/14/2008, -0/+5I really wanted to shoot ;(
- Rocco03, on 09/14/2008, -2/+7Great, more ways to deliver ***** ads.
- iainc, on 09/14/2008, -0/+5Nice! Now tell everyone why, or just shut the ***** up.
- kevdotbadger, on 09/14/2008, -0/+5$("canvas").hide(); ?
- ElBeh, on 09/14/2008, -2/+7This is getting a bit old.
- adverpart, on 09/14/2008, -1/+5It'll be their problem once people start using these features, especially and . With the current state of the web, people aren't going to wait for legacy users. That was the 1990s philosophy.
- gsnedders, on 09/14/2008, -0/+42022 is when there will be two fully interoperable implementations passing all n thousand (or maybe million) test cases. No W3C standard ever written would be published as a recommendation under that requirement. More relevantly, the spec will basically be finished by next year.
- Kral, on 09/14/2008, -0/+4A virus that formats the disk will eventually wipe everyone out that refuses to upgrade their browser. The problem will solve itself Darwin style.
- init100, on 09/14/2008, -1/+4"The only difference is XHTML uses a larger file size to express the same information."
What are you talking about? - mrBitch, on 09/15/2008, -0/+3RE: " A virus that formats the disk will eventually wipe everyone out that refuses to upgrade their browser. The problem will solve itself Darwin style. "
Interesting idea. This "forced evolution" may actually be why browser upgrades WILL occur for all those who use ie6 as their web browser of choice. - gsnedders, on 09/16/2008, -0/+3Yeah, Philip never got round to implementing that. :)
- TheKitchenSinkX, on 09/14/2008, -0/+3I can't digg that down in good conscience.
- iofthestorm, on 09/14/2008, -1/+4
- gsnedders, on 09/14/2008, -0/+3There is no extra HTML 5 specific complexity in the parser. XHTML 2 has nobody big planning on implementing it. And that's ignoring the fact that draconian error handling doesn't work (more and more feed readers have non-draconian parsers, for example).
- inactive, on 09/15/2008, -0/+3you're using scripts though.
- Huevoos, on 09/14/2008, -1/+4What? 2009? I can't wait that long.
- Alexio, on 09/14/2008, -1/+3You make an interesting point. Try playing the textured version it links to. It's impossible in Firefox and yet very fast using Chrome.
Google's lightning quick JavaScript engine is very useful here. - svivian, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2Um, how is the "video" tag not semantic?
- Kral, on 09/14/2008, -1/+3'draconian error handling' does work.
If you create an HTML document and it's broken, something has to make sense out of it at some point for it to be displayed. Either the tool used to author/publish it, or the tool used to read it. Currently, it's the tool used to read it - FireFox uses a TagSoup parser and a /lot/ of logic to try and figure out WTF you actually meant. The problem is, every browser has their own version of that, and every browser will come up with a different result for various cases. Tools to manipulate HTML face the same challenge - it's so hard that most people just give up and resort to fragile regexes.
So instead, why not have the tool used to author/publish the document contain the TagSoup parser, and produce the valid document? This means you don't risk your content being massively broken in different browsers because of the different implementations of second-guessing the author as the document will be valid from the start, and there was no change in the process to the author - they were still able to write their gibberish HTML and publish it. Since the authoring/publishing tool should already be doing validation, this is the logical place for such mess to reside. Browsers are then free to be 'draconian' which means MUCH less code for them to write and maintain so they can spend time doing interesting things like the canvas element instead, and tools to manipulate the document are trivial as they're also free to be 'draconian' and skip the incredibly complex author second-guessing altogether.
XHTML 2 didn't fail because it had 'draconian' error handling, it failed because it changed too much too fast. - inactive, on 09/14/2008, -0/+2Content neutral means that xml does not discriminate on what kind of data is contained within a tag. HTML 5 does accomplish this with the tag but it is less versatile and isn't integrated into the basic structure of the language.
It will result in less quality applications because it is harder to develop applications for, has a longer learning curve, and allows for a messy syntax which can take longer to parse. - 0xception, on 09/14/2008, -1/+3Backwards compatibility for one.
- benologist, on 09/14/2008, -4/+6Canvas is ok but it's not exactly going to change the web, it doesn't even begin to catch up to Flash or Silverlight. SVG was dead before it was born.
HTML 5 is really just the beginning of what needs to be done to keep the HTML/CSS/JS combo relevant, and it's 10 years late and still doesn't address a lot of key functionality that is missing in browser-based applications. - talmand, on 09/14/2008, -0/+2I'm not sure about HTML5 having new tags for defining layout. I don't see much of a reason for sidebar over id="sidebar" other than to make life easier for search engines. Plus it's assuming everyone needs the same layout elements which in the end may stifle innovation in layout and presentation of interfaces.
- Kral, on 09/14/2008, -1/+3HTML 5 supports an XHTML dialect, and it's the only way you can mix namespaces. XML is still the path to the future of the web.
- stuffradio, on 09/14/2008, -0/+2Not sure, but it should be interesting!
- inactive, on 09/14/2008, -1/+3i can just see someone spraypainting "***** HTML 5" outside an office building then running back to theirs.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 122 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is