Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

XHTML 2 is dead, long live HTML 5

  • 04-07-2009 12:21pm
    #1
    aidan_walsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,208 ✭✭✭✭


    http://www.w3.org/News/2009#item119
    2009-07-02: Today the Director announces that when the XHTML 2 Working Group charter expires as scheduled at the end of 2009, the charter will not be renewed. By doing so, and by increasing resources in the HTML Working Group, W3C hopes to accelerate the progress of HTML 5 and clarify W3C's position regarding the future of HTML.

    Its not quite Bluray/HD-DVD, but I guess its pretty close to the equivalent for this forum. Any concern on which to go with in the future is closed.

    Which begs the question: Any of you started working (playing, testing or producing) with HTML 5 yet, or still sticking your preferred XHTML flavour?


Comments

  • #2
    tomED
    Registered Users Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭tomED


    aidan_walsh wrote: »
    http://www.w3.org/News/2009#item119Which begs the question: Any of you started working (playing, testing or producing) with HTML 5 yet, or still sticking your preferred XHTML flavour?

    Personally have only played a little with HTML5 - as you might have seen from other posts I'm not really a standards advocate - but it's right that we move on to the next level.

    It just pushes us on to develop newer, greater things.


  • #3
    mewso
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 8,805 Mod ✭✭✭✭mewso


    If you're not a standards advocate I think you might welcome html5. I am a standards advocate and with xhtml 2.0 gone my hope is that html5 might have some wrinkles ironed out.


  • #4
    lucideer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 101 ✭✭lucideer


    mewso wrote: »
    If you're not a standards advocate I think you might welcome html5.
    Yup. HTML5's direction was always a compromise, XML serialising/Polyglot included or not. This news was a long time coming, not really news at all really, but still very disappointing all round.

    I think I'll be sticking to XHTML 1 for some time. I can always write <video> shims and extended dtds if I need to...


  • #5
    tomED
    Registered Users Posts: 1,452 ✭✭✭tomED


    mewso wrote: »
    If you're not a standards advocate I think you might welcome html5.

    Well my point being we won't be rushing to move to the latest standards, just because they are "the latest standards".

    I don't want to open up that debate here - just wanted to clarify my point! :)


  • #6
    Placebo
    Registered Users Posts: 8,070 ✭✭✭Placebo


    seen some updates,
    using standard '<>' tags, u can get a default [most used ] layout of a header, footer, right/left sidebar for menu and a content right beside it.

    could be good !


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    CivilServant
    Registered Users Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭CivilServant


    What exactly does this mean for webpages?


  • #8
    p
    Registered Users Posts: 2,119 ✭✭✭p


    CivilServant wrote: »
    What exactly does this mean for webpages?
    Basically means they're going to take an approach of adding and updating HTML as we know it, rather than trying something more revolutionary.

    For end users it probably the impact will probably be very subtle.


  • #9
    mewso
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 8,805 Mod ✭✭✭✭mewso


    It will probably benefit the user a lot actually. The input element for example has new possible type values like date, time, url, email etc. Browser vendors will probably eventually support these meaning date/time pickers etc. without the need for extra script.

    I'm just concerned that as a specification it's like html 4.0 and xhtml combined. We chose which one to use and thats that by either creating xml output or html output. There will be no pressure for anyone to use xhtml (or xml) and especially since IE still doesn't support it and has less impetus to do so now.


  • #10
    lucideer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 101 ✭✭lucideer


    mewso wrote: »
    There will be no pressure for anyone to use xhtml (or xml) and especially since IE still doesn't support it and has less impetus to do so now.
    Exactly. No impetus at all really. Namespacing in particular, while incredibly flexible and easy to use, is an XML feature that kind of scares people who are not too used to it. Now, with the clumsy attempts at integrating inline SVG and MathML directly, un-namespaced into the HTML5 spec, there'll be no incentive to namespace and we'll see no further innovative extensions to the namespace as we've seen before with the likes of RDFa.

    Am I too much of an optimist to believe that IE8 would have had to support application/xhtml+xml if the W3C had never capitulated by announcing the development of HTML5? HTML4.01 was supposed to be the end of tag soup.


  • #11
    p
    Registered Users Posts: 2,119 ✭✭✭p


    mewso wrote: »
    It will probably benefit the user a lot actually. The input element for example has new possible type values like date, time, url, email etc. Browser vendors will probably eventually support these meaning date/time pickers etc. without the need for extra script.
    So, how will that affect the users then?


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    Goodshape
    Registered Users Posts: 8,488 ✭✭✭Goodshape


    p wrote: »
    So, how will that affect the users then?

    Off the top of my head, it will be easier to find/parse/extract that information.

    It will be obvious to a 3rd party app, script or search facility that this is a <video> which was posted on <date>.

    It's not as though the user is going to say "wow, thank goodness for HTML5!" but it may enable some cool things which they can appreciate.


  • #13
    mewso
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 8,805 Mod ✭✭✭✭mewso


    p wrote: »
    So, how will that affect the users then?

    Well I think most users prefer a date picker with an input instead of just the input on it's own. If browsers implement datepickers based on inputs with the date type value then sites that don't have date pickers will be easier to use. Just as an example.


  • #14
    charybdis
    Registered Users Posts: 802 ✭✭✭charybdis


    p wrote: »
    So, how will that affect the users then?

    You can remove Flash and and be free of its woeful resource efficiency and methods for deploying intrusive advertisements.


Advertisement