Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 4th Dec 2007 21:01 UTC, submitted by irbis
Internet & Networking "The web is constantly evolving. New and innovative websites are being created every day, pushing the boundaries of HTML in every direction. HTML 4 has been around for nearly a decade now, and publishers seeking new techniques to provide enhanced functionality are being held back by the constraints of the language and browsers. To give authors more flexibility and interoperability, and enable more interactive and exciting websites and applications, HTML 5 introduces and enhances a wide range of features including form controls, APIs, multimedia, structure, and semantics."
Thread beginning with comment 288589
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Pre-Standard Implementation
by WarpKat on Wed 5th Dec 2007 00:16 UTC
Member since:

One thing I'm dreading at the moment is that some company (Microsoft) will implement a half-baked version of the standard before it even becomes a standard, and if the standard omits tags MS thinks it can't do without, guess what? The browser wars will begin all over again.

Anyone willing to put money on this?

Reply Score: 1

Almafeta Member since:

The specification already includes at least two tags -- 'audio' and 'video' -- whose implementation are left completely up to the browser.

Soon, the three major browsers will be divided by a common standard...

Reply Parent Score: 2

Coxy Member since:

Yeah, and as with HTML 4, anything without an implementation specifically defined will get rendered differently by the browsers.

Of course, people will blame MS for this and say IE gets it wrong again even though it was just left up to the browser to handle rendering, like so many of the rendering problems that are claimed to be IEs fault with HTML 4

Reply Parent Score: 2

Beta Member since:

Left completely up to the browser?
The API is defined, the behaviour is defined, the only free control they have is browser controls (and now sadly codecs too).

The audio and video tags were neutered by both Microsoft and Apple because they claim Ogg isn’t safe (patent-wise), even though it’s been in the wild for years with many people using it (some portable devices can decode it, my samsung for one).

The wording of Ogg codec support was changed from “must” to “should”.

Probably the stupidest thing W3C could have done, because even if Apple & Microsoft dont implement it, we want a good standard, right?

Reply Parent Score: 3