Talk:HTML5

HTML is the new HTML5

Did this whole article miss this announcement from nearly 2 years ago? http://blog.whatwg.org/html-is-the-new-html5

• HTML5 "is now basically being used to mean anything Web-standards-related"
• "The HTML specification...just...known as 'HTML'"
• "The WHATWG HTML spec can...be considered a "living standard"

HTML5 is not a markup language, HTML is. HTML5 is basically an open source brand name encompassing all open web technologies. HTML is a living document that encompasses the rest of what this Wikipedia article discusses. This whole article needs to be rewritten. HTML5 was the successor of HTML 4.01, but it isn't anymore. Now it's just HTML. HTML5 has it's own story which should be reflected in this article. Antiaverage (talk)

Browser Support

Can the article discuss current browser support for this (emerging) standard? What features can I reliably use now with FireFox, for example? Thanks! --Lbeaumont (talk) 03:00, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Also make it clear than HTML5 is "supported" by everything. It's a question of levels of support, for the new features added. No browser is going to see HTML5 and simply refuse to display it (avoiding the need for past techniques, such as browser sniffing). This behaviour is deliberately encouraged by some design features within HTML5, particularly for the doctype declaration. Andy Dingley (talk) 08:21, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

• See Comparison of layout engines (HTML5) under Gecko. LittleBen (talk) 12:16, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

HTML5 Used as a Buzzword, As a Bigger, Much Greater and More Abstract "Thing"

I think it's worth noting, early on in the article (perhaps in the introduction), that HTML5 is also widely used as a broader term, which encompasses more widely standardized JavaScript standards and CSS3. For example, any presentation you've ever seen regarding HTML5 (I participated in one of the HTML5 W3C conferences in Redmond, WA), talks about much more than just HTML itself. On the contrary, HTML is the hub language for several other languages and functionalities (WebGL, CSS3, Canvas, JavaScript functionalities (WebSockets, IndexedDB, WebWorkers, etc.)), and -- IMHO -- is more of a paradigm that is hitting the web world; NOT just a language. HTML5 is the golden opportunity for all browser vendors to strive for standards compliance. We've seen a much wider effort on behalf of all browser vendors, internet companies, educational institutions, and web developers alike (oh, and the W3C), to "get it right" this time around. So, HTML5 is a much bigger "thing." It's the evangelical voice vying for semantics, accessibility (ARIA), and pushing web languages into new horizons (PhoneGap, mobile devices), and even the increasing potential of integrating WebGL, CSS3 transforms, SVG, and interactive 3D gaming. phew! Do it proud. Danielbullis (talk) 05:56, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

You are right, however HTML5 is a real thing i.e. there is a definition, and there is what people think it means. Like you said HTML5 has become this buzzword to mean anything that is new in the world of the web. The issue is that people (your average joe) still has issues with the real definition, and if we start talking about the idea that the definition and the buzzword are different things, I think it is going to make the issue worse. I am not saying that it should not be talked about but it needs to be made clear that what people call HTML5 and what HTML5 is are different things. --Inputdata (talk) 11:48, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Living Standard - means what exactly?

Can anyone explain that, ideally as a separate section in the main article? Hopefully I'm not the only one ignorant of what that is supposed to mean (apart from being a carte blance for Browser developers to cherry pick features and feel justified in doing so).--Cyberman TM (talk) 04:46, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

It's not really a detailed enough concept to warrant a whole section, or even paragraph, of it's own. In fact, it's already described quite well at one point in the article: "The concept of a living standard is that it is never complete and is always being updated and improved." In essence, this means it's always in both the live and development phases, and changes are rolled out almost instantly, rather than being conglomerated into incremental builds. drewmunn talk 08:33, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Then it must be me, but I still don't get it how something can be a standard if it's in constant flux. The moment you stop reading, your information may already be outdated. Still, thanks for the reply, I'll try to think it over a few times, maybe I'll understand then. --Cyberman TM (talk) 07:42, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

The point of it is that it evolves, but everyone is using the same hymnsheet. In general, things that have been standardised already in html5 are not altered significantly in an update, so you're unlikely to be incompatible with html5 if you've read an older version of it. The updates generally deal with new elements, or new ways of dealing with background methods regarding new elements. Older versions of the html5 standard are still classed as html5, so they are still supported, but new 'bits' are being added to flesh it out. None of the updates say "forget everything so far. This is html5 now", they say things like "remember this feature, well now we're added a new one alongside it." drewmunn talk 08:35, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

The sentence now reads "The WHATWG organization will continue its work with HTML5 as a "Living Standard". The concept of a living standard is that it is never complete and is always being updated and improved. New features can be added but functionality will not be removed." Does this make it clearer? I would agree that before its hard to see how something can be a standard and a living standard at the same time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inputdata (talk • contribs) 16:49, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

What is HTML5 to most people?

There is still a lot of people in the comments section asking questions along the lines of "Give a list of HTML5 OS's". Thus proving that they still do not understand that HTML5 is just a new standard. They seem to think that it is software to download. The article does not help in that it never explains anything, it just talks about HTML5 from the standpoint of someone who already knows what HTML is. If you are just a normal person who has heard the term and googled it, the article is next to useless at explaining. There needs to be (and in fact it has been requested) a section talking about HTML5 from the standpoint of a person who is finding about about the term for the first time. Inputdata (talk) 11:57, 13 May 2013 (UTC)