Back Home

Open Designs

Community. Driven.

General Talk: HTML 5

Bottom of Page

1 to 8 of 8

  1.  
    • CommentAuthorjoncarico
    • CommentTimeFeb 6th 2007 edited by joncarico on the 06th February 2007 at 16:40:26 EST
     
    So, I came across this page today, and I was wondering what you people might think about the new HTML 5?

    I noticed the < kbd > tag, which could be used for voice commands, and the < progress > tag.

    Anyways, I thought it was cool to have a look at the new stuff that is coming out.
    •  
      CommentAuthorsofaspud
    • CommentTimeFeb 6th 2007 edited by sofaspud on the 06th February 2007 at 18:00:10 EST
     
    Interesting. I wonder how long it will be before it's supported by most browsers (or how long before it even becomes an official standard).

    edit: here's a list of some of the more interesting ones
    •  
      CommentAuthorDENiAL
    • CommentTimeFeb 6th 2007
     
    Posted By: sofaspudInteresting. I wonder how long it will be before it's supported by most browsers (or how long before it even becomes an official standard).


    A guess, a year for everyone.. 4 Years for Internet Explorer.. devil
    •  
      CommentAuthorLobsterMan
    • CommentTimeFeb 7th 2007
     
    I never heard of HTML 5, I thought they were dropping HTML and moving on to XHTML
    And it's not mentioned on the W3C site. but I did find the draft for XHTML 2
    •  
      CommentAuthorarwen54
    • CommentTimeFeb 7th 2007
     
    yes, I saw that as well, Joe. Did you see some of the tags and how everything would be in sections?
    •  
      CommentAuthorChristopher
    • CommentTimeFeb 7th 2007 edited by Christopher on the 07th February 2007 at 06:16:39 EST
     
    I read over the XHTML 2 specifications a while back, one thing that struck out was how much simpler it seems. As a brief example when including an image via the img tag you do not have to specify an alt tag. Instead you write it as follows:

    <img src="christopher.jpg">christopher</img>
    Which would show the image as per usual, if the image wasn't available then the enclosed text would be shown. Makes perfect sense to have it that way in my opinion.

    Reference: Section 20.1
    •  
      CommentAuthorgnome
    • CommentTimeFeb 7th 2007 edited by gnome on the 07th February 2007 at 17:22:42 EST
     
    Joe is right: HTML is being dropped, as is SGML in general. that HTML 5 will likely never become a standard of any sort, because at a point in the future, browsers will require the code to be an XML-based standard.
    •  
      CommentAuthorarwen54
    • CommentTimeFeb 7th 2007
     
    Posted By: christopherI read over the XHTML 2 specifications a while back, one thing that struck out was how much simpler it seems. As a brief example when including an image via theimgtag you do not have to specify analttag. Instead you write it as follows:

    <img src="christopher.jpg">christopher</img>
    Which would show the image as per usual, if the image wasn't available then the enclosed text would be shown. Makes perfect sense to have it that way in my opinion.

    Reference:Section 20.1


    yes, I really like that idea! also I like the way the img tag is closed...one of the things most people learning XHTML have trouble with is remembering to add the /> at the end of an image tag or break tag to close it.

1 to 8 of 8

  1.