PUBLIC MARKS with tag html5

I did notice however several mentions of the "HTML5 standard" that led me to write this post to remind the community of the current status of the specification, both in practice and on the standards track.. HTML5 isn't a W3C standard. We certainly look forward to the day when it is, but it isn't yet. In fact, the specification, co-authored by Ian Hickson from Google, is still very much a work in progress.

Rappelons que HTML5 est le format "sérialisé à la SGML" du document, pour le standard on devrait écrire HTML 5 (mais Google a plus de mal à le trouver dans ce cas). Et Hickson nous rappelle dans les commentaires comment il peut être pragmatique (cf. hier).

I’m just a spectator, albeit a very interested one, but I have long thought that Hickson possesses just the right mix of pragmatism and idealism for this job.

Sauf que le pragmatisme 2.0 ressemble bigrement à de l'infantilisme.

The document is currently over 930 pages when printed "letter" size. The first complaint I get from implementors wanting to review the specification is that it is unreviewable: too long, to complex, too difficult to review individual sections, too difficult to find the definition of terms, or where things are used.

L. Masinter, J. Downdell, Matt May (ex W3C) - ces jours-ci, le front anti-html5 vient d'adobe.

John Dowdell en raccourci : Flash a placé la barre tellement haut que forcément ça fait des jaloux. Et ce Ian Hickson, ça serait-y pas un peu l'Antéchrist ?

Plus intéressante est la réaction d'Isofarro (#3), qui ressitue le contexte et l'origine du what-wg.

The irrelevant attribute has been renamed to hidden.

Si je comprends bien, les défenseurs les plus vocaux du processus HTML 5 actuels sont censés être allés se cacher ? C'est ça ?

Google’s role is not free from the perception of conflict of interest, and that coupled with Ian’s endorsed role as a dictator will affect the credibility of the outcome produced. In particular, it will give Microsoft all of the excuse it needs to avoid implementing the standards. (Not that eliminating that excuse will magically cause Microsoft to participate…)

I think the HTML5 project is misguided in the same way that ES4 was. It is trying to do too much without a clear mission that defines the problems it is solving. I think the project needs a reset. I want to refocus it with the intention of producing the smallest possible standard, rather than the largest possible standard.

I would call the replacement project HTML4.2. It would be tempting to call it HTML4.1, but the current HTML standard is HTML 4.01, so the potential for confusion is too great.

Opinionated Doug is opinionated, and I think it's a good thing.

Incidentally, I used validator.nu to check my work. It seemed the most up to date, but there’s no guarantee it’s perfectly accurate.

Etant donné que c'est le seul qui soit sérieusement fait, on espère qu'il est à peu près à jour. Maintenant, difficile de valider un machin mouvant comme HTML 5 (et à quoi ça sert d'abord, étant donné qu'aucun navigateur n'implémente le gros de la spéc, à savoir les 232 pages d'algorithme de parsing).

une approche pragmatique, préférant les évolutions aux modifications radicales, et adoptant les technologies ou pratiques déjà largement partagées par les auteurs de contenus actuels

Qu'est-ce-qu'il ne faut pas lire comme stupidités de nos jours.

The Burst Engine is an OpenSource vector animation engine for the HTML5 Canvas Element. Burst provides similar web functionality to Flash and contains a layer based animation system like After Effects. Burst uses a very light-weight JavaScript frame, meaning your animations will download unnoticably quick and can be controlled using very simple JavaScript methods. For example: the [-] logo above is a Burst animation attached to a mouseOver event using the following code...

canvas is the next Flash or not