Slashdot Mirror
W3C Announces Plan To Deliver HTML 5 by 2014
The World Wide Web Consortium has proposed "a new plan that would see the HTML 5 spec positioned as a Recommendation—which in W3C's lingo represents a complete, finished standard—by the end of 2014. The group plans a follow-up, HTML 5.1, for the end of 2016." Instead of working toward one-specification-to-rule-them-all in 2022, features that are stable and implemented in multiple browsers now will be finalized as HTML 5.0 by 2014 with unstable features moved into HTML 5.1 (developed in parallel). In 2014, the commonly implemented parts of HTML 5.1 will begin finalization for 2016, with the unstable parts moved into HTML 5.2 (wash, rinse, repeat). Additionally, things like Web Sockets are being moved into their own modular standards (sound familiar?) for "...the social benefits that accrue from such an approach. Splitting out separate specifications allows those technologies to be advanced by their respective communities of interest, allowing more productive development of approaches that may eventually be able reach broader consensus."
Wow, let's not rush into anything here guys.
Just in time for the first HTML6 browsers.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
Which bit is the Fear, which is the Uncertainty and which is the Doubt? Or are you just using FUD as a synonym for "bad" for no apparent reason?
I wonder if it will even matter anymore?
With everyone willingly giving up everything to go into walled gardens, and the obvious superiority of native code applications*, is HTML5 a dead end?
Discuss! (ha)
* Not saying that pretty much all apps on smartphones I've used aren't buggy, featureless, poorly designed piece of shit--they are--so much so. And I love the openness of using web sites and never having to need to update my software. I love it. I'm just saying they have the *potential*.
Many "native walled app" are wrappers around html5. If you want something to run cross platform, and don't have any taxing performance requirements, it is an easy way to go.
So basically it's the browser vendors that eventually determine what goes in and what stays out? How much of an influence will Internet Explorer have on this?
Mozilla is still giving HTML 5 a shot with FirefoxOS, but unless major phone manufacturers pick up on that it's DOA as far as I'm concerned.
Finalize the things that we already have, this long-stretched process is already hurting the web.
The Duke Nukem of markup languages
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Someone will always want the <blink> tag.
As I see it, the <blink> element is presentational and should ideally be implemented with CSS text-decoration:blink or with a CSS animation on an element's opacity. It could gain a retconned semantic meaning, just as the <b>, <i>, <s>, and <hr> elements did in HTML5, but I don't see what that meaning would be.
And by 2019, all the browsers on the market may actually support it consistently, just like they did with HTML2, HTML3, HTML4! (that was sarcastic for the sarcasm challenged).
Are you making fun of the fact that Firefox still can't center the text in a table using the <col> element 14 years after HTML 4.0 came out? :|
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
And this is a huge problem for me as well, as I'm working on a project hoping for something better out of HTML5.
Streaming video with sensitivity to bandwith is something not available in the HTML5 spec at all. It's a simple "video" tag, which offers very little flexibility. h.264 will be the standard, VP8 is effectively dead. And that's fine, but when you have a situation where you want to auto adjust the quality based on bandwith (ala Silverlight "Smooth Streaming" or Flash), you can't do it in HTML5.
There's a project in works called MPEG DASH to do something around this, but that project is moving slower than molasses. I think people are content to keep using Flash or Silverlight, but in reality.. developers really want better options and HTML5 is already an archaic standard in a lot of senses.
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
I'm really worried. I've actually said the W3C should do everything they're going to do. It's not like the world is gaining sanity, which means I'm the one going insane.
I'm wondering what they'll be doing for the doctype declaration though, since it doesn't indicate any version (which is short sighted in my opinion)
Doesnt seem likely.. Firefox market share has been dropping since the beginning of 2010 (lost almost 1/3rd of its market share), telling us that more and more people are not satisfied with the browser. Why would people want to adopt an entire new OS built on something that they are growingly not satisfied with?
ChromeOS has much more of a chance, and by most people estimates, that chance is somewhere between slim and fat.
"His name was James Damore."
Using HTML5's GetUserMedia()
Parent seems to be upset about something or other, discuss!
How would sites that drop Flash in favor of HTML5 canvas convince users of older versions of Internet Explorer to install Google Chrome Frame?
How much is a IE user that can't or won't install Chrome Frame worth compared to a tablet user? (and consider that Flash is deprecated on Android too).
What audio codec would be used with the sound that is synchronized with the vector animation? Chromium, Firefox, and Opera support only freely licensed codecs, while Internet Explorer and Safari support only MPEG codecs.What audio codec would be used with the sound that is synchronized with the vector animation? Chromium, Firefox, and Opera support only freely licensed codecs, while Internet Explorer and Safari support only MPEG codecs.
Both. Storage is cheap.
What tool would be used to make animations that would be played by a Canvas-based player? Keying in vector coordinates frame by frame isn't fun.
Adobe Edge Animate.
Dilbert RSS feed