Slashdot Mirror
How HTML5 Will Change the Web
snydeq writes "InfoWorld's Peter Wayner looks beyond the codec and plug-in wars to examine nine areas where HTML5 will have a significant impact on Web development. From enabling more interactive graphics, to tapping local file storage, to geolocation, HTML5 is rife with rich capabilities — and may even improve our ability to secure applications delivered via the Web, Wayner writes. But the most important impact of HTML5 will be its ability to simplify Web development itself: 'HTML5 offers one language (JavaScript), one data model (XML and DOM), and one set of layout rules (CSS) to bind text, audio, video, and graphics. The challenge of making something beautiful is still immense, but it's simpler to work with a unified standard.'"
Doesn't HTML5 JS still provide XSLT as well as DOM?
Virtually serving coffee
The link you really wanted where everything is on one page: http://www.infoworld.com/print/128080
The problem with browser rendered languages till now is that they have been at the mercy of interpretation differences by different vendors. Is this really likely to change?
HTML5 may offer a unified way to do things...but that does not mean that the other ways will just vanish. It will be a long time before HTML5 completely displaces Flash or Java applets, assuming that such a thing even happens. Frankly, I doubt that the popular browsers will even have a reliable implementation of the standard until at least 2013, so HTML5 won't really offer developers anything unified for a while.
Palm trees and 8
It will be adopted by progressive advertisers to achieve even greater degrees of annoyance per page
I've seen the future and it's having a 50% off sale for the first 100 customers to click now!!
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
HTML5 will help change the Web, however, the true change that will come to the Web is finally when the Semantic Web will take off; unfortunately no one knows when or if it ever will.
Michael
http://s1.sfgame.us/index.php?rec=58163
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Will there be possible to have "CanvasBlock" on future browsers or are we stuck with CPU eating html5 animations?
"may even improve our ability to secure applications delivered via the Web..."
Why do people even say these things?
Somebody has to actually use it first.
Wasn't Youtube supposed to be switching to it months ago?
ahh, the summary is wrong both from a W3C DOM standards perspective, because java is listed as the 2nd language supported by the W3C. the summary is wrong from a second perspective in that language bindings to HTML5-compliant web browser engines such as XulRunner and WebKit have been available for years. if Microsoft actually intend also to follow the HTML5 process properly, then it can be said that MSHTML, through its COM interface, also offers other language alternatives for decades rather than just years.
now it's a sad fact that nobody really *knows* that you can get at HTML5-compliant web browser engines and use DOM functions (3000+) and access DOM properties (20,000+) through XPCOM, or Glib/Gobject or COM, but it's perfectly possible. the best demonstration of this at its most extreme limit, taking advantage of absolutely all HTML5 W3C DOM features, is the http://pyjs.org/ pyjamas project, which abstracts the differences between these three major web browser engine types (XulRunner, Webkit and MSHTML aka Trident) and presents a single uniform API. on top this uniform API, normalising the discrepancies between the three engine types, an entire Desktop GUI Widget Set API has been created.
so the statement that there is "one HTML5 language: javascript" is just nonsense. for further examples of accessing HTML5 DOM using python, some of which will lead through to links to Ruby accessing HTML5 DOM such as AppCelerator, see http://wiki.python.org/moin/WebBrowserProgramming
In a couple weeks Apple is unleashing a new ad campaign all using HTML5 (as opposed to the flash & rich media (java) ads up till this point). Granted they are all going to be only viewable on compatible browsers (everything but IE), it is going to be interesting to watch advertising take on this new medium.
When will we get webcam streaming as flash offers?
So far we have text, a codec and artwork.
When will web 2.0 be interactive again?
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
In HTML5, the browser returns the latitude and longitude of the user to Javascript. Shouldn't the browser also return the planet, local star etc?
How will ISS visitors browse?
An ambitious slogan. Things may become easier or faster, but this certainly won't change the web in the same way that say, the web changed how I read the news or how I shop for furniture.
One language (JavaScript) to rule them all, one data model (XML and DOM) to find them, one set of layout rules (CSS) to bring text, audio, video, and graphics and in the darkness bind them.
Why do I have a bad feeling about this?
No left turn unstoned.
Personally I'll be sticking to JSON
Choose your allies carefully, it is highly unlikely you will be held accountable for the actions of your enemies
We must take the HTML5 specification and throw it into the Cracks of Doom. That is the only way to stop Ian Hickson from destroying the World of Men.
Yet another technology to implement Pacman with :D
When a true random sampling of internet users shows 80%+ of those users using browsers with good HTML 5 support, then I'll start using HTML 5.
Until then, as an internet developer for a small business, it's still HTML 4. We don't have the money to do both and we have to go where the users are.
I'd be happier if we hadn't had a moving target to work with for the past 15 years, with new W3C specifications becoming the vogue while major browsers still failed to implement older ones correctly. Also HTML5 is more "different" than "groundbreaking", which will just lead to more incompatibilities in browsers without a big benefit. :-P
How's the W3C reference implementation coming along by the way?
"I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
Do we really need to have a 'HTML 5 rules' article monthly?
HTML5 is just another level of bullshit to worry about when writing a web page that needs to render properly on multiple browsers.
As web designers look to increase the functionality of their websites, people are always looking for ways to reduce their capabilities. Flashblock/Adblock/Pop-up blockers and finally even private browsing features built right into web browsers. Why is there this huge disconnect between what designers are doing v.s. what people like to see? I understand the need for ads, but the seizure inducing flash pop-ups are just insane, don't designers realize that they are actually irritating their potential customer rather than enticing them to click on the ad?
HTML5 will improve security
While I love many things about HTML5, the idea of throwing out rendering libraries and starting again from scratch does not necessarily fill one with confidence about the security of the tools. Sure, less reliance on plug-ins means less opportunities for 3rd party security holes. But doing everything in the browser code itself also means that the potential attack vectors have more direct control over the machine. Plus any new library is going to have security vulnerabilities for a while.
I'm not saying HTML5 is insecure. But let's not kid ourselves: there will be a year or two of scrambling to fix new attack vectors.
The ______ Agenda
ZOMBO
And there is Microsoft only doing a subset of the spec, and users expecting to get the latest whiz bang stuff backported to IE6 and even worse IE6 mobile...
Why are we using HTML5 and not XHTML 2?
XML abuses aside, XHTML is superior to HTML5.
HTML5 requires a more complex parser than XHTML ever will. XHTML can be validated for correctness, HTML5 is more difficult to do so.
I honestly don't understand the reason for following the HTML route. XHTML is already in an industry understood format that tools already exist for.
The market rarely reflects a superior technology. I still support XHTML. HTML5 is messy, ugly and a kludge.
All that needs to happen is to transfer some of the newer tags of HTML5 into XHTML. Perhaps we can borrow from the microformat peeps? Afterall, it's supposed to be modular.
Slashdot needs Geekcode | Can anyone recommend any good SCIFI? My tastes: Foundation, Startide Rising, CITY, Ringworld,
***HTML5 will allow applications to tap local file storage***
Once or twice a decade I encounter a "They can't possibly be serious" moment. This is one of those occasions.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
All this talk about canvas and video tags is interesting, but not what I'm looking for. I just want those date, number and patern input elements. Once those are in place and widely used, my business javascript will be greatly simplified. Yes, I know that I can use third party tools, but that is still running javascript. Having those elements native to the browser will speed up perfomance and cut down on the amount of javascript tremendously.
Ol' Rick Dawson had a farm EIEIO
....until IE6 finally dies.
That sounds accurate about the actual parsing complexity but I didn't necessarily mean complexity at run time.
I meant that a XHTML parser would imaginably much simpler than a HTML5 parser.
If markup was a programming language, it's like comparing HTML5 as the dynamically typed language that accepts whatever you throw at it and XHTML5 is a rigid statically typed language.
IMHO, it's better to have clever data structures rather than clever programs. XHTML is a smart format requires a dumb program whereas HTML is a dumb format and requires a smart program.
The web developers should understand the markup they use to develop. It's their responsibility as a developer.
Slashdot needs Geekcode | Can anyone recommend any good SCIFI? My tastes: Foundation, Startide Rising, CITY, Ringworld,
Makes for interesting reading since you bring up pyjamas and the general topic is web development and standardization.
First of all, its not one language when you count all the PHP, Java / JSP, ASP, Python, Perl, Tcl etc that runs on the server.
Second of all, that one language should be Python FTW.
The current versions of all the major browsers can now dynamically download fonts. We can finally stop putting display text in images. Opera, Safari, Chrome, Firefox (3.6 or greater) and IE are all on board with this. By IE 9, they'll even be using the same font format, Web Open Font Format. (Except for the iPad, which, for some weird reason, currently requires fonts in SVG format. But even the iPad understands "@font-face")
Few sites are using this capability yet. We are, as a demo. Try our steampunk search engine with authentic Victorian fonts.
Seems to be a minor thing simply wrong in every single point...
Point #1 is flat wrong on this count:
If drawing images is your goal, then the Canvas object may be powerful enough. But if you want to build specialized 3-D worlds like the ones found in the more sophisticated Flash and Shockwave games, you may be pining for the old days...
Erm... Maybe WebGL isn't officially part of HTML5, but it's there, and Chrome is implementing it. And personally, I'd much rather force people to download a decent open source browser than a decent proprietary plug-in -- there's alway Chrome Frame if you really need it.
Point #2:
some developers deliberately disabled the Flash plug-in to avoid the headaches and overhead of rendering heavy Flash content. That won't be an option in the future.
Bullshit. It'd take less than ten minutes to put this jQuery in a Chrome extension: $('canvas').remove();
Point #3:
Game programmers might store descriptions and artwork locally, saving the time of downloading the information again and again.
That's what HTTP caches are for, and they work for XHR, too!
Please, no one do this. Ever. HTML5 storage is for storing data. When you use it for caches, you add that much more stuff we might inadvertently back up, that much more cache we can't automatically purge (to claim disk space) or expire (from disuse), and you're doing more work to duplicate functionality HTTP already has.
Point #4:
The so-called microformats in HTML5
I'm confused... microformats don't require HTML5, do they?
Point #5 is fine, though it doesn't mention potential privacy concerns.
Point #6:
Google's new format will see some usage, for example in YouTube, but will never reach anywhere close to the ubiquity of H.264.
Erm, do you know something we don't? Last I checked, YouTube is still H.264 -- in a Flash container, no less.
Point #7, I don't care about.
Point #8:
This claim of better security, though, is a bit of a wild guess. The devious minds may use their malice aforethought to take advantage of the nice integration, perhaps drawing PayPal logos with the Canvas object...
So phishing will be easier? Big deal. Hasn't Flash been the biggest vector for actual client-side pwnage for awhile?
Point #9:
Now, if only HTML5 came with the nice collection of tools that Adobe makes for Flash.
Adobe has said they plan to target HTML5.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
This kind of article make me sick. It's propaganda for something that's not even remotely a revolution but is presented as one. Yes html5 good. Is it going to change much? No, not really. Also, enjoy your flash bashing. If there's anything you have to thank for pushing everyone forward, it's flash. Remember it.
That's easy... fewer and fewer web sites will work correctly as HTML5 is "embraced", and users will be forced to decide between downloading yet another borked PITA bloated update that won't actually work until they give up and just buy another computer or shutting their computer off and going outside, maybe walk to the park or down the street to the local pub, watch some ball, have a beer.
But using "outside" language bindings results in a hybrid application rather than a pure Web app, and then you depend on the portability of that particular binding (i.e. does XulRunner run on iPhone? etc).
If you want portability, then "one language" is a given, and that is JS. Now, there is still a possibility to take a different language and compile that to JS - as GWT does for Java, or WebSharper does for F#.
, both are very bad. The box method of lay out is far superior! Most of the cool features are not in the HTML5 spec but other new specs "server push, web sockets, ...." but when forced to use the bad layout you still have crap.
HTML 5 comes in 2 formats:
XML and that messy html 4
The MIME type from the webserver indicates which one it is in the http protocol.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
If all browsers switched (after a year of widely publicised warning time, say) to displaying an error message rather than render broken pages, then all of the pages whose owners (or readers) care about them would be fixed within another year after the great "web quake" (the transition to valid pages only.)
That would actually be a really smart thing to do, in that it would support a more sane evolution of the technology going forward.
But it wouldn't be a likely thing to be done, given human history, in which "barely good enough, but basically sucks" rules the roost. (e.g. dominant position of Windows etc.)
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
Would it make porn websites load faster?
the difference is: which one is actually implemented on a large scale
the browser vendors are using html5, therefore, the case is closed and the issue is settled. nothing else matters
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Page scraping becomes more of a nightmare on HTML markup sites
The site's terms of service likely prohibit scraping anyway because scrapers discard adverts. Instead, you're supposed to get the Atom feed, formatted in (yup) XML.
You can no longer simply just use the XML toolkit that comes with just about every language as standard nowadays and will need an HTML5 parser
Every language has such a parser available or should very soon. For example, see html5lib for Python and html5lib for PHP.
working with XML is easy, you can just XSLT transform the output into something that fits your system, then XSLT transform it back to their system, this means interfacing with legacy or proprietary stuff is easy.
Or you can use the HTML5 parser to make a DOM tree and XSLT transform that.