HTML 5 wtf?
- Started
- Last post
- 15 Responses
- zarkonite0
your nav is going be:
header > nav {CSS}
footer > nav {CSS}and so on... CASCADING style sheet, get it? =)
- acescence0
xhtml was a dumb idea, good riddance. is it html? is it xml? no, it's neither!
- All html is XML, XHTML is just a way of "compiling" the code.zarkonite
- html is not valid xml, that's why xhtml exists. except, it's parsed by an html parser...acescence
- http://friendlybit.c…acescence
- ukit0
Why are you worried? There's no need to migrate as of yet.
I'm sure mainstream browsers will read HTML 4 for another several years if not longer. Microsoft hasn't even announced plans to implement most of HTML 5 in their browser.
Also, FYI, just declaring your doc as HTML5, doesn't mean you have to use any of the new tags. The only things that will be deprecated will be frames (along with certain attributes changing here and there).
- ukit0
If I have <div class="nav"> there is no way for a bot to understand what it is reading. If I have <nav class="mynav"> then it knows it is looking at navigation. That seems like a step forward to me.
Really this is stuff they should have done a long time ago. If you read the history of HTML, it's such a clusterfuck, don't assume that the way it is now is good;)
As far as video and audio, I don't think it's over yet. The next few years will be interesting. Granted, they will probably be frustrating and annoying for web designers/ developers because there will be less browser consistency than before.
- Stugoo0
still worrying about ie6 tbh
- me too unfortunatelysection_014
- yeah me too... theres a javascript declaration u can use to force styling html5trooperbill
- sorry cant depend on javascriptStugoo
- section_0140
Also, not having to close tags is a step backwards as well. XHTML has it right....all tags need closed.
- Autokern0
Oh, and video and audio will never happen, since all the browser vendors disagreed on which format to use. So no standard and no real chance to use them.
- trooperbill0
yeah fuck it all, even divs, instead just have a single wrapper tag and some semantic tags like h1 etc and use css... div, span, blockquote, ul and p etc are all silly and overlap too much.
plus for seo reasons the last thing you want at the top of your code is a repeated header, we always start with the content first!
- ukit0
Yes, you are. Having a <section> tag or a <nav> tag is readable by search engines etc. So it becomes understandable what the elements on the page are regardless of how much additional styling is needed.
- Autokern0
See you in 2022 guys.
- ernexbcn0
the canvas tag is cool stuff, also getting rid of cookies and their stupid size limits and going with a full sqlite database
- Stugoo0
think thats it. adding classes and ids will be more focused on javascript targets and specific elements.
- section_014
I've been reading up on the HTML 5 spec and at this point I think it makes things more confusing. Aside from the video and audio tags which are interesting and seem to be going in the right direction.
Other than purely search engine food, the <header>, <nav>, <footer>, <article>, <section>, <aside>, etc tags seem to make things more confusing. More than likely, you will be adding additional classes or id's to style these elements making the markup more verbose.
For instance, sites often have a top and side navigation or navigation options in the footer. That's 3 seperate navigations which a sole <nav> tag couldn't cover and would need a class or id. How exactly is <section class="foo"> better than <div class="foo"> for "generic" sections? Perhaps while organizing a stylesheet, but it seems like a step backwards to me. div's work well. I name it what I want, how I want.
Am I missing something?