3...2...1... go!
For me it doesn't really bring anything groundbreaking to the web world, and as for now it still seems not to be compatible with some browsers.
Although I really like upcoming WebGL technology - finally something that utilizes hardware acceleration, without a doubt it'll be a major leap forward.
As for HTML5 itself, it feels very javascript-like, have some neat gimmicks implemented like shading, fast gradients, glow effects or simplified formatting.
But in my opinion the best it can do currently is to establish a common denominator for low-quality pure html websites.
what are your expectations?
What do you mean "nothing groundbreaking"? Canvas, video, audio and the likes.
And I'm using HTML5 right now, regularly, and all the basic parts of it I use are compatible with Firefox, IE7+, Opera, Safari, Chrome...
And you also need to learn the difference between HTML and CSS.
Are you still in the process of learning HTML or what?
what is there not to understand about the difference between html and css ?
are you implying that "canvas, video and audio" are never before seen things on the internet?
Yes nothing revolutionary at all:downs:
by the way here's something made 100% in html 5
[URL]http://mugtug.com/sketchpad/[/URL]
Whats revolutionary is that the browser supports it all be default. You don't have to go download flash, quicktime, and shittons of other plugins. Not that thats a big bother, but trust me. twenty years from now when the browsers of today finally become the standard of the business world you'll see the devs for gods.
imagine your school computers, only running all those flash games, youtube, audio stuff, and everything all on its own. Plus, webmaster's don't have to 'assume' their viewers have such plugins installed now, they'll know their content works right in the browser, correctly.
[QUOTE=Wii60;21436359]Yes nothing revolutionary at all:downs:
by the way here's something made 100% in html 5
[URL]http://mugtug.com/sketchpad/[/URL][/QUOTE]
+javascript
[QUOTE=a2h;21436237]What do you mean "nothing groundbreaking"? Canvas, video, audio and the likes.
And I'm using HTML5 right now, regularly, and all the basic parts of it I use are compatible with Firefox, IE7+, Opera, Safari, Chrome...
And you also need to learn the difference between HTML and CSS.
Are you still in the process of learning HTML or what?[/QUOTE]
It may come to you as a surprise then, but allow me to introduce you to some relatively new technologies you might have skipped along the years:
- javascript
- embedded java applets
- Adobe Flash
- Microsfot Silverlight
to name the popular ones.
all of these have been offering the solutions html5 provide for years now, even GPU accelerated gfx in thanks to java, plus far more like direct networking, filesystem operations and OS integration features.
As for "standarization" - fair enough, it's always a good idea to elevate the core functionality, nevertheless a fundamental problem arises:
to allow the same flexibility of usage of these new features to match for example Flash, it requires development tools with at least same capabilities - thus recreating from scratch what Adobe has been developing for quite some time.
plus - any extra features would require incorporating thir party solutions and again - compromising the purity of html-only approach.
hardly a break-trough though, remaking already developed features, though it might certainly ease new developers into using extra functionality html5 offers, without the need to learn new platforms like Flex for RIAs.
[QUOTE]
by the way here's something made 100% in html 5
[url]http://mugtug.com/sketchpad/[/url]
[/QUOTE]
2008: [url]http://www.sumopaint.com/app/[/url]
The difference is this is JUST html, you don't have to have flash installed to use sketch pad, but you do for that paint app.
HTML is vastly superior to adobe flash. Check this out:
[url]http://www.w3schools.com/html5/html5_reference.asp[/url]
Can anyone explain me what's the point of having command like <footer> or <content> or <header>? <div class="header"> is just as simple...
<header> looks simpler to me. And it will make things easier in the future. But by all means continue using <div class="header"> if you want to. And you can use it because you can use HTML5 seamlessly with any other form of HTML.
[QUOTE=Crhem van der B;21441044]Can anyone explain me what's the point of having command like <footer> or <content> or <header>? <div class="header"> is just as simple...[/QUOTE]
Semantics. There's something beautiful about using a single tag that you can style rather than entering into div/class hell
[QUOTE=turb_;21441954]Semantics. There's something beautiful about using a single tag that you can style rather than entering into div/class hell[/QUOTE]
up until we end up with:
<header>
<footer>
<sidebar>
<module>
<navigation>
<content>
<wrapper>
<main>
and 100 other tags ;_;
[QUOTE=__stdcall;21436883]It may come to you as a surprise then, but allow me to introduce you to some relatively new technologies you might have skipped along the years:
- javascript
- embedded java applets
- Adobe Flash
- Microsfot Silverlight
to name the popular ones.
all of these have been offering the solutions html5 provide for years now, even GPU accelerated gfx in thanks to java, plus far more like direct networking, filesystem operations and OS integration features.
As for "standarization" - fair enough, it's always a good idea to elevate the core functionality, nevertheless a fundamental problem arises:
to allow the same flexibility of usage of these new features to match for example Flash, it requires development tools with at least same capabilities - thus recreating from scratch what Adobe has been developing for quite some time.
plus - any extra features would require incorporating thir party solutions and again - compromising the purity of html-only approach.
hardly a break-trough though, remaking already developed features, though it might certainly ease new developers into using extra functionality html5 offers, without the need to learn new platforms like Flex for RIAs.
2008: [url]http://www.sumopaint.com/app/[/url][/QUOTE]
= "Why fix it if it isn't broke" or "Why reinvent the wheel" except with :downs:
What we're seeing of it now is no indication of what things will be like in 5 years
It's too early. Of course it's going to look bad compared to more mature technologies
[QUOTE=Maccabee;21438099]HTML is vastly superior to adobe flash. Check this out:
[URL]http://www.w3schools.com/html5/html5_reference.asp[/URL][/QUOTE]
I'm not really sure if they can be compared, especially at the moment.
Thank fuck flash is dying. That's all I care about.
Simply put people who do not see the potential in HTML are either not developers and wouldn't get it anyway. Or developers in the regions that HTML5 threatens.
In case the latter, worry not, bitch less there will still be a place for your technologies, just in much more specific use cases.
In the prior, stop trying to understand it and go back to playing Mafia wars. We'll let you know when we're ready to vastly improve it.
Whoah, Mozilla did a [url=https://developer.mozilla.org/samples/raycaster/RayCaster.html]raycaster[/url] in with HTML5 and Javascript.
Want to know why HTML5 is a big deal. Go to youtube, and replicate these results.
[url]http://craftymind.com/factory/html5video/CanvasVideo.html[/url]
[QUOTE=Sumtoxx;21488688]Want to know why HTML5 is a big deal. Go to youtube, and replicate these results.
[url]http://craftymind.com/factory/html5video/CanvasVideo.html[/url][/QUOTE]
Badass.
Though, can't imagine a real use for this...
The more dynamic we can get with displaying contents the better.
The most interesting thing is that the image quality looks pretty good compared to Youtube.
I guess none of you have seen Papervision or Away3D in action
I think I will wait for some more experienced developers to comment. I really couldn't care less for "omgz just look how cool html5 is!". Some technical insight is welcome.
(just in case: [url]http://www.derbauer.de/[/url] GPU Accelerated Flash, still experimental, don't know if it can compete with WebGL though)
If HTML5 were just some browser plugin or flash lib, it would be nothing special at all.
But it's not. It's HTML. That's why it's special.
HTML is a [URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specification_(technical_standard)]specification[/URL], not a piece of software. This means that many different solutions can be used to bring a browser to spec, & portability is a lot more possible. Flash on Linux is a nightmare, as are a lot of browser plugins (if they're available at all).
A lot of things are being made possible by HTML5 that were a huge pain in the ass (if possible at all) before without the use of a proprietary platform. HTML is an open standard, so nobody is relying on Adobe's Flash Player / Company X's Browser-Plugin Y etc.
The average Windows user won't notice many shiny new features from HTML5 alone, but developers will be more productive with less proprietary bullshit to work through. Everyone wins in the end.
[QUOTE=__stdcall;21490642]I guess none of you have seen Papervision or Away3D in action
I think I will wait for some more experienced developers to comment. I really couldn't care less for "omgz just look how cool html5 is!". Some technical insight is welcome.
(just in case: [url]http://www.derbauer.de/[/url] GPU Accelerated Flash, still experimental, don't know if it can compete with WebGL though)[/QUOTE]
With all the respect I can muster, you truely are talking out of your ass. Plugins are no the answer, the less we can use them for every day dev, the better. Using the same logic, why worry about embedded fonts when you have SiFR?! Why get excited about rounded CSS3 corners when you can just have a big ass background image? Compatibility and flexibility are primary concerns when developing for a medium that has to cater to an audience with no technical common denominator. And basing a site entirely around a solution that requires an additional download but also adds a metric ton of compatibility issues (see flash & silverlight) is a colossal risk. Being able to remove that risk and replacing it with something that not only is supported from within browsing clients, but also degrades gracefully is a massive weight off the collective shoulders of devs everywhere.
Not to mention the variation of devices. No longer just a desktop, but d myriad of laptops, netbooks, smartphone, tablets.
If you want to develop with a focus to those sort of devices, plugins are essentially redundant. HTML5 will let us bring rich content to a lot more platforms and take a big chunk of time and effort overheads out of the equation.
Pretty sure flash was created because of the lack of ability to display animations and make games through HTML. Flash CS5 is supposed to have the ability to export to HTML5 which is probably Adobe more or less dropping their swf format.
OP is like saying that HL2 running in a browser completely coded in HTML5 wouldn't be anything special because we've already seen it running outside a browser
I think it's a great thing. Pure and simple.
[QUOTE=garry;21644942]OP is like saying that HL2 running in a browser completely coded in HTML5 wouldn't be anything special because we've already seen it running outside a browser[/QUOTE]
Case in point [url]http://www.nihilogic.dk/labs/wolf/[/url]
This. OP lost all ability to differentiate between web apps and local apps.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
