Your opinions on HTML5 - Developers

[QUOTE=turb_;21770814]What if someone tries to register with hello`+there@παράδειγμα.δοκιμή Your magical email validation system falls right down. For the record, that's a valid email[/QUOTE] Don't valid emails have to end with real TLDs?

[QUOTE=Roast Beast;21783957]Don't valid emails have to end with real TLDs?[/QUOTE] Yeah that too.

[QUOTE=KmartSqrl;21786912]Yeah that too.[/QUOTE] Hurr durr dumb shit, that is a real TLD. As I said, it's a valid email, and your shit regex will probably fail it. [editline]04:52PM[/editline] [QUOTE='-[ Fizzadar ]-;21781593']To be honest, most sites shouldn't even request an email, or it should be optional.[/QUOTE] [img]http://ahb.me/1bo[/img] :smug: [editline]04:54PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Pixel Heart;21782652]I'm loving HTML5, and I'm really hoping major companies like YouTube, Google, and Adobe all utilize it[/QUOTE] Google uses it: [img]http://ahb.me/1bp[/img] YouTube uses it: [img]http://ahb.me/1br[/img] Adobe is putting an 'Export to HTML5' feature into Flash.

[QUOTE=Pepin;21763381]... It just isn't animation with this though, it is also the math. All the tests do the same thing, generate x amount of particles and then calculate their path based on some algorithm.[/QUOTE] There should be even less of a difference in that regard, Mozilla uses the same JIT as Adobe do in Flash (Adobe wrote it, and donated the source code to Mozilla) Edit: And yes, the URL posted before is a real site. [url]http://παράδειγμα.δοκιμή/[/url]

[QUOTE=turb_;21788923]Hurr durr dumb shit, that is a real TLD. As I said, it's a valid email, and your shit regex will probably fail it.[/QUOTE] What are you 12? Grow up and get off your high horse, you're not impressing anyone by trying to insult people. I'll admit I didn't know it was a valid TLD (and wasn't curious enough to look it up at first) but that doesn't change the fact that since it is a valid email, properly written email validation would let it through. Honestly I don't know why I'm arguing this with you in the first place. The second you said... [QUOTE=turb_;21730957]They should enter their email address correctly[/QUOTE] ... it became painfully apparent that you have no real world UX design experience. There's a very simple solution that solves all the problems you're ranting about with email validation... [B] No one ever said validation means you need to prevent the user from submitting the form. [/B] If you're that worried about supporting email addresses that no one is ever going to be using you can just display a small notification telling the user that their email looks funny and that they should double check it to make sure it's valid. The majority of users will never see this notification unless they actually did screw something up, so it's no harm to those users, and since you still allow the form to be submitted when the email isn't validating you're not harming the few people who will have legitimate emails that don't validate. It's a simple solution to a simple problem. You still have support for any funky emails, and you still have a layer of validation to stupid proof your form. Piece of cake. Also, it's worth nothing that when I say emails that no one is ever going to be using, I'm not talking about IDN emails, I'm talking about emails with all sorts of funny characters in them. [editline]01:09AM[/editline] [QUOTE='-[ Fizzadar ]-;21781593']To be honest, most sites shouldn't even request an email, or it should be optional. The only use is annoying newsletters, notifications and forgotten password, well, I don't forget my passwords, so I don't need an email registered, but yet they insist.[/QUOTE] From a usability perspective it's actually better to have people login with their email than with a username. People are much less likely to forget their email address, and it's also a good fix for user duplication issues if you implement email verification.

Let's say you've written the perfect email validation routine. Johhny User comes along and decides not to put in his correct email and rather put in a fake email. How do you protect the user against that?

If that is something you need to handle you handle it via email verification, which is a completely different subject. You obviously can't run validation on a fake email if the person intended it to be a fake email from the get go, if you think that is what validation is for you are missing the point entirely.

Exactly my point, you can't check whether an email even exists by regexing it, so half the stupid-proofing you talked about completely misses typos, which makes it a waste of time IMO. I'll come to somewhat of a compromise with you regarding validation and that is to check it contains an @. Anything beyond that is stupid because although it may work 95% of the time, the other 5% will just piss off your users.

[QUOTE=turb_;21790764]Exactly my point, you can't check whether an email even exists by regexing it, so half the stupid-proofing you talked about completely misses typos, which makes it a waste of time IMO. I'll come to somewhat of a compromise with you regarding validation and that is to check it contains an @. Anything beyond that is stupid because although it may work 95% of the time, the other 5% will just piss off your users.[/QUOTE] WHY ARE WE HAVING THIS ARGUMENT? Stop complaining about having too many features. If you don't want to use type="email" then don't. Nobody's holding a gun to your head and telling you to like it.

[QUOTE=turb_;21788923] [img]http://ahb.me/1bo[/img] :smug: .[/QUOTE] As it should be, awesome :) The only time I've ever required email was because registration would be literally one thing, email. It then sends your password to the email and you use email/password to login, means people who are 'active' have a valid email, and it makes registration insanely easy. [editline]01:39AM[/editline] Turb, how do you stop spam-registrations?

Most sites shouldn't even require registration tbh. We're drowning in profiles and passwords and usernames and newsletters and fuckwhatnot. OpenID better catch on quick.

[QUOTE='-[ Fizzadar ]-;21824316']Turb, how do you stop spam-registrations?[/QUOTE] I don't, there's no point to spam registering at AnyHub

[QUOTE=BmB;21824406]Most sites shouldn't even require registration tbh. We're drowning in profiles and passwords and usernames and newsletters and fuckwhatnot. OpenID better catch on quick.[/QUOTE] i'm so glad google is an OpenId provider now, i kept losing track of my OpenID accounts because the services that use it are the ones I rarely use.

Functions not depending on single companies while providing more functions overall and maintaining clean definitions. It's a good move.

HTML5 is great, but if its performance is much less than flash.......It'll be interesting to see what the big companies go for; compatibility or speed/bandwidth conservation. They'll probably stick with the old way of doing things for 5+ years after HTML5 is released then start switching to HTML5. I personally can't wait. Anything that will make my job easier I'm up for. All I know is, it's a real pain in the ass to make a website. You have to understand all these complex concepts and try to make everything compatible with IE6 (YUK!!!). I'm waiting for all of us to get out of the dark ages.

Hey look, finally someone gets it: [url]http://snook.ca/archives/opinion/filling-in-the-gaps[/url] HTML 5 is never going to kill flash with it's current feature set. That's all there is to it. There are entirely too many things that you either just won't be able to do in HTML5, or won't be able to do even remotely efficiently. Yeah it will replace it for common things like image rotators (which javascript already has for the most part), or graphs and things like that, but when it comes to heavily interactive pages you're still likely going to be seeing a lot of flash. [QUOTE=nitsua;22036261]HTML5 is great, but if its performance is much less than flash.......It'll be interesting to see what the big companies go for; compatibility or speed/bandwidth conservation. They'll probably stick with the old way of doing things for 5+ years after HTML5 is released then start switching to HTML5. I personally can't wait. Anything that will make my job easier I'm up for. All I know is, it's a real pain in the ass to make a website. You have to understand all these complex concepts and try to make everything compatible with IE6 (YUK!!!). I'm waiting for all of us to get out of the dark ages.[/QUOTE] IE6 isn't going away any time soon.

Not this again. I found a brilliant article on it over on Smashing Magazine. [quote="Luke Reimer"]I’ve read a lot of blog posts lately about HTML5 taking on Flash like a prize fighter and kicking it off the scene in some epic battle of Web standards and pragmatism. But this is a false scenario: HTML5 and Flash are not meant to be fighting in the same ring, or to be fighting at all. Each has its proper place on the Web and in the graphic community.[/quote] [url]http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2010/05/18/html5-and-flash-why-its-not-a-war-and-why-flash-wont-die/[/url]

[url]http://gizmodo.com/5542688/google-wants-to-save-web-video-with-the-new-webm-format[/url] Looking awesome for HTML5 <video> y'all.

Oh good, some people that agree with me that HTML5 isn't going to kill flash. The way flash has been improving, the next release (with as4) will be really good.

[QUOTE=Pepin;22058684]Oh good, some people that agree with me that HTML5 isn't going to kill flash. The way flash has been improving, the next release (with as4) will be really good.[/QUOTE] I tend to agree with the article I posted, they shouldn't need to be fighting, but there are still a lot of things we won't need flash for anymore. [quote="The Article"]Flash has been misused and overused for the past eight years, spreading its tentacles too far into the fabric of Web design. But rather than getting beaten out of the picture by these practical new Web frameworks, Flash will retreat to its proper place: those niche areas where it belongs and can truly excel. The first niche is multimedia and learning solutions for the corporate space. Only time will tell if Flash finds its second niche on mobile platforms.[/quote]

Honestly, HTML5 is and will be amazing. So many 'disrupting' features that can have the potential to kill a few aftermarket solutions will come from it. But it's still in the same position as css3, great and amazing... But still fresh and new. Even though the latest versions of browsers support a few features of the spec, not all do. You've always got to take backwards compatibility into account. That said though... Man html5 is [B]fucking sweet.[/B] :D

[QUOTE=Cluckyx;22040836]Not this again. I found a brilliant article on it over on Smashing Magazine. [url]http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2010/05/18/html5-and-flash-why-its-not-a-war-and-why-flash-wont-die/[/url][/QUOTE] This. A million times this. Cluckyx, you seem to be one of the few rational people here. Gold stars for you.

[QUOTE=natethegreatt;22089914]This. A million times this. Cluckyx, you seem to be one of the few rational people here. Gold stars for you.[/QUOTE] :smug:

Flash is easy to program to, for people who don't have the "code gene" in them. While HTML5 doesn't have an editor like flash, it's pure code. That's why I support flash, and flash can always be improved or remade from scratch. But HTML5 does have potential, it just needs more support from browsers and less forced usage.

[QUOTE=Blackwater;22098761]Flash is easy to program to, for people who don't have the "code gene" in them. While HTML5 doesn't have an editor like flash, it's pure code. That's why I support flash, and flash can always be improved or remade from scratch. But HTML5 does have potential, it just needs more support from browsers and less forced usage.[/QUOTE] Theres always Dreamweaver in design mode :D:D. Hurr. Honestly, if someone trying to make a website would even attempt it in flash... They need to find a new line of work. Flash is great for streaming video, indie games, those bastard-child ads you hate, and for animations. HTML5 is just a shiny new version of html4 with some updated syntax. [B]Flash won't die[/B], not because of HTML5 alone at least. while html5 [I]can[/I] replace many things flash can do today... You're basically doing it the hard way. Flash is pretty well supported today, and html5 is lacking that support. So there won't be some revolution or overnight transition, it'll slowly seep into your life without you knowing the difference. Kinda like aids. :D

[QUOTE=Blackwater;22098761]Flash is easy to program to, for people who don't have the "code gene" in them. While HTML5 doesn't have an editor like flash, it's pure code. That's why I support flash, and flash can always be improved or remade from scratch. But HTML5 does have potential, it just needs more support from browsers and less forced usage.[/QUOTE] It's not like if it was hard to code in HTML though.

[QUOTE=Blackwater;22098761]Flash is easy to program to, for people who don't have the "code gene" in them.[/QUOTE] Or professionals who have tight deadlines and specific project requirements, or who like working with a well supported and well established environment. That's one of the things all the anti-flash people don't seem to acknowledge ever. Flash has an amazing toolset that has been being fine tuned for years now, and is actually aimed towards creating interactive experiences. HTML on the other hand, is essentially still nothing but glorified text editors.

[QUOTE=KmartSqrl;22140237]HTML on the other hand, is essentially still nothing but glorified text editors.[/QUOTE] Last I checked, HTML wasn't a text editor.

[QUOTE=turb_;22142266]Last I checked, HTML wasn't a text editor.[/QUOTE] Last I checked I was talking about the dev tools, read it again.

[QUOTE=Ibutsu;21448774]Thank fuck flash is dying. That's all I care about.[/QUOTE] This. Switched to Chrome just so I could use the HTML5 YouTube player and such.