Comments on: HTML 5 and the Wizard of Oz http://ajaxian.com/archives/html-5-and-the-wizard-of-oz Cleaning up the web with Ajax Thu, 09 Feb 2012 06:55:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2 By: JonathanLeech http://ajaxian.com/archives/html-5-and-the-wizard-of-oz/comment-page-1#comment-274147 JonathanLeech Thu, 25 Jun 2009 17:01:30 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6996#comment-274147 @Hixie - At least I didn't say I dislike you more than Remy. That's a pretty low bar. @Hixie – At least I didn’t say I dislike you more than Remy. That’s a pretty low bar.

]]> By: Hixie http://ajaxian.com/archives/html-5-and-the-wizard-of-oz/comment-page-1#comment-274137 Hixie Wed, 24 Jun 2009 21:18:22 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6996#comment-274137 JonathanLeech: :-( JonathanLeech: :-(

]]> By: zachstronaut http://ajaxian.com/archives/html-5-and-the-wizard-of-oz/comment-page-1#comment-274136 zachstronaut Wed, 24 Jun 2009 20:16:37 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6996#comment-274136 Halo, Audio/video/canvas could work just fine in XHTML2... they might be invoked with different syntax, but there's no reason the functionality can't be there. You're of course right on several points. It sucks that it isn't being implemented by vendors. However, you're also wrong on some of your points. "It’s simply far a too late in the game to remove backwards compatibility" That statement doesn't jive. Just as Windows has legacy support for DOS and OSX had legacy support for OS9, an XHTML2 enabled browser could have legacy support for previous markup languages. Browser vendors are free to support legacy markup in their XHTML2 browsers. I don't see why you are saying these things are mutually exclusive. They aren't at all. It is too bad that we may drag the dead weight of the past with us as the web moves forward. There's a great opportunity here to apply what we've learned in the last 16 years. I firmly believe it is always best to educate yourself about your options rather than just dismissing something based on subjective opinions. Halo,

Audio/video/canvas could work just fine in XHTML2… they might be invoked with different syntax, but there’s no reason the functionality can’t be there.

You’re of course right on several points. It sucks that it isn’t being implemented by vendors. However, you’re also wrong on some of your points.

“It’s simply far a too late in the game to remove backwards compatibility”

That statement doesn’t jive. Just as Windows has legacy support for DOS and OSX had legacy support for OS9, an XHTML2 enabled browser could have legacy support for previous markup languages.

Browser vendors are free to support legacy markup in their XHTML2 browsers. I don’t see why you are saying these things are mutually exclusive. They aren’t at all.

It is too bad that we may drag the dead weight of the past with us as the web moves forward. There’s a great opportunity here to apply what we’ve learned in the last 16 years.

I firmly believe it is always best to educate yourself about your options rather than just dismissing something based on subjective opinions.

]]> By: Halo http://ajaxian.com/archives/html-5-and-the-wizard-of-oz/comment-page-1#comment-274135 Halo Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:55:26 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6996#comment-274135 XHTML2 is dead in the water - I firmly believe there's no point educating yourself in a spec that is not backwards compatible and no-one is willing to implement. It could be the best standard ever, but it doesn't matter if no-one uses it. It's simply far a too late in the game to remove backwards compatibility, especially one that isn't a revolutionary deviation from what we currently have. The 'buzz' over HTML5 is that browser vendors are involved, has lots of new interesting features (and, yes, audio/video/canvas <i>is</i> part of the issue), and people are actually implementing it. XHTML2 is dead in the water – I firmly believe there’s no point educating yourself in a spec that is not backwards compatible and no-one is willing to implement. It could be the best standard ever, but it doesn’t matter if no-one uses it. It’s simply far a too late in the game to remove backwards compatibility, especially one that isn’t a revolutionary deviation from what we currently have.

The ‘buzz’ over HTML5 is that browser vendors are involved, has lots of new interesting features (and, yes, audio/video/canvas is part of the issue), and people are actually implementing it.

]]> By: JonathanLeech http://ajaxian.com/archives/html-5-and-the-wizard-of-oz/comment-page-1#comment-274120 JonathanLeech Tue, 23 Jun 2009 19:43:28 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6996#comment-274120 The only public figure in software development I dislike more than Ian Hickson is Remy Maucherat. The only public figure in software development I dislike more than Ian Hickson is Remy Maucherat.

]]> By: hansschmucker http://ajaxian.com/archives/html-5-and-the-wizard-of-oz/comment-page-1#comment-274116 hansschmucker Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:51:11 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6996#comment-274116 Works fine here (FF 3.5 as well... probably some addon going bonkers). Here's the direct URL: http://www.cssquirrel.com/images/comic/cs023.png Works fine here (FF 3.5 as well… probably some addon going bonkers). Here’s the direct URL:
http://www.cssquirrel.com/images/comic/cs023.png

]]> By: DiSiLLUSiON http://ajaxian.com/archives/html-5-and-the-wizard-of-oz/comment-page-1#comment-274115 DiSiLLUSiON Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:51:41 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6996#comment-274115 Can't view the "full comic". That website doesn't display properly in ff3.5 @ 1360x768; I can only see the first 100 pixels or so and no way to scroll. Can’t view the “full comic”. That website doesn’t display properly in ff3.5 @ 1360×768; I can only see the first 100 pixels or so and no way to scroll.

]]> By: hansschmucker http://ajaxian.com/archives/html-5-and-the-wizard-of-oz/comment-page-1#comment-274099 hansschmucker Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:09:26 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6996#comment-274099 Zach, I've left another comment for you on the previous post. Go have a look :) Zach, I’ve left another comment for you on the previous post. Go have a look :)

]]> By: hansschmucker http://ajaxian.com/archives/html-5-and-the-wizard-of-oz/comment-page-1#comment-274098 hansschmucker Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:07:57 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6996#comment-274098 100% with you (although I wasn't after reading your first sentence, until you clarified it later on). HTML5 is a great feature-set which implements important functionality, but it would be nice to update the actual document structure along with it. Problem is we probably won't see that happening. Backwards compatibility is very important on the web and XHTML2 is in many ways radical. (X)HTML5 is a more incremental approach and seems a lot more likely to gain mainstream adoption. Like it or not: The web is incremental. 100% with you (although I wasn’t after reading your first sentence, until you clarified it later on).

HTML5 is a great feature-set which implements important functionality, but it would be nice to update the actual document structure along with it.

Problem is we probably won’t see that happening. Backwards compatibility is very important on the web and XHTML2 is in many ways radical. (X)HTML5 is a more incremental approach and seems a lot more likely to gain mainstream adoption.

Like it or not: The web is incremental.

]]> By: zachstronaut http://ajaxian.com/archives/html-5-and-the-wizard-of-oz/comment-page-1#comment-274097 zachstronaut Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:00:08 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6996#comment-274097 I think that the XHTML2 spec would be a better direction for the future of the web than the (X)HTML5 spec. People should educate themselves about the differences between the two specs: http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/ http://dev.w3.org/html5/markup/ http://xhtml.com/en/future/x-html-5-versus-xhtml-2/ I'm actually a bit peeved by all the marketing-speak buzz around "HTML5" as of late -- after WWDC -- specifically when referring to the Canvas, Video, and Audio tags. Those three web features need not be exclusive to HTML5. People should not confuse the specs for an entire markup language with a little bit of buzzed about functionality. I think that the XHTML2 spec would be a better direction for the future of the web than the (X)HTML5 spec. People should educate themselves about the differences between the two specs:

http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/
http://dev.w3.org/html5/markup/
http://xhtml.com/en/future/x-html-5-versus-xhtml-2/

I’m actually a bit peeved by all the marketing-speak buzz around “HTML5″ as of late — after WWDC — specifically when referring to the Canvas, Video, and Audio tags. Those three web features need not be exclusive to HTML5. People should not confuse the specs for an entire markup language with a little bit of buzzed about functionality.

]]> By: hansschmucker http://ajaxian.com/archives/html-5-and-the-wizard-of-oz/comment-page-1#comment-274096 hansschmucker Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:20:53 +0000 http://ajaxian.com/?p=6996#comment-274096 Ian is a great man when it comes to "stabilizing" a spec, but yes, it can be tough to get new stuff past him. The real issue isn't him though, but the fact that HTML5 is said to be a "draft" when it's actually already being implemented. What we need is getting our real draft back where we can put up stuff for approval and wait for people to raise issues. HTML5 needs an "unstable" spec, that is not maintained by somebody as strict as Ian where ideas can be developed and refined. Having said that, we still need somebody like Ian to maintain the stable version. Anything less and we'll end up with a mess of contradicting spec parts and unclear definitions. Ian is a great man when it comes to “stabilizing” a spec, but yes, it can be tough to get new stuff past him.

The real issue isn’t him though, but the fact that HTML5 is said to be a “draft” when it’s actually already being implemented. What we need is getting our real draft back where we can put up stuff for approval and wait for people to raise issues.

HTML5 needs an “unstable” spec, that is not maintained by somebody as strict as Ian where ideas can be developed and refined.

Having said that, we still need somebody like Ian to maintain the stable version. Anything less and we’ll end up with a mess of contradicting spec parts and unclear definitions.

]]>