4 ms·

I really doubt you could pass HTML5 compatibility as a "basic internet access".

by kbart 10y ago

NicoJuicy 10y ago
HTML 5 IS part of the web, so why shouldn't it? By not having several html 5 functions, you actually disallow access/usage to certain websites.
- madeofpalk 10y ago
  Lets be honest here, are you saying that a web-based real-time-communications API is a basic human right? > Apple has no reason to "not" include it, except financial gain. The reason they have not to include it is that they have different priorities than browser vendors who want to jam mobile browsers full of every unripe API under the sun (like those that dangerously leak user's real connection info even when behind a VPN).
  - NicoJuicy 10y ago
    I'm saying that yes, webrtc is part of the HTML 5 web and so should be a basic human right. I'm not saying that it is though.
    - madeofpalk 10y ago
      Except when WebRTC actually isnt a part of HTML5 (yet), it's only a draft specification.
      - stephenr 10y ago
        Stop bringing logic and facts to a pitchforks and torches kind of discussion. /sarcasm
        NicoJuicy 10y ago
        I upvoted him ;)
- kbart 10y ago
  Apple doesn't provide Internet access -- ISPs do. Nobody forces you to choose Apple's products, there are plenty of others to choose from.
  - Esau 10y ago
    This is the answer. If you have a problem with the product, don't buy it.
  - NicoJuicy 10y ago
    For basic internet access to the general public you need: - broadband - a browser Broadband is by ISP's and a browser is in this case by Apple. And yeah, i don't buy Apple ( obviously). "Add to homescreen" is probably my most used functionality :p .
    - dogma1138 10y ago
      You are confusing the internet with the World Wide Web, Apple does not support Flash do you want to claim that a flash plugin is a human rights issue? Because I can guarantee that the amount of content you cannot access due to lack of flash is orders of magnitude greater than what you cannot access due to lackluster HTML5 support. In fact I can't think of any HTML5 content which you would not be able to view, it might not be formatted properly but it will be accessible.
- efdee 10y ago
  Calling HTML5 a basic human right erodes the concept of basic human rights. Please don't do it.
- briandear 10y ago
  Could you argue that developers using HTML 5 are violating human rights because not every browser fully supports it? Developers are fully aware that not every feature is available on every browser -- yet they willingly use those technologies anyway. It's clear we should drag developers in front of a UN Tribunal to account for their willingness to deny the world basic human rights. This has gotten beyond absurd. I can't remember when I voted to make HTML 5 a human right. I can think of a lot more important things that might ought to be addressed (and enforced) first.
cowsandmilk 10y ago
obviously the standards process moves slower than innovation on web technologies, but many of the things that iOS doesn't support are not yet standards. E.g. WebRtc, which Nexedi's link shows had an update to the draft in September, so clearly it is not yet stabilized. The legal basis for requiring compatibility seems much thinner for complying with working drafts (or a working group note, edited August 31, September 7, and September 15, in the case of the webm link). I mean, what level of compatibility should you have with a document that says: > Implementors who are not taking part in the discussions are likely to find the specification changing out from under them in incompatible ways.

I really doubt you could pass HTML5 compatibility as a "basic internet access".

by kbart 10y ago

I really doubt you could pass HTML5 compatibility as a "basic internet access".

HTML 5 IS part of the web, so why shouldn't it? By not having several html 5 functions, you actually disallow access/usage to certain websites.

madeofpalk 10y ago
Lets be honest here, are you saying that a web-based real-time-communications API is a basic human right? > Apple has no reason to "not" include it, except financial gain. The reason they have not to include it is that they have different priorities than browser vendors who want to jam mobile browsers full of every unripe API under the sun (like those that dangerously leak user's real connection info even when behind a VPN).
- NicoJuicy 10y ago
  I'm saying that yes, webrtc is part of the HTML 5 web and so should be a basic human right. I'm not saying that it is though.
  - madeofpalk 10y ago
    Except when WebRTC actually isnt a part of HTML5 (yet), it's only a draft specification.
    - stephenr 10y ago
      Stop bringing logic and facts to a pitchforks and torches kind of discussion. /sarcasm
      - NicoJuicy 10y ago
        I upvoted him ;)
kbart 10y ago
Apple doesn't provide Internet access -- ISPs do. Nobody forces you to choose Apple's products, there are plenty of others to choose from.
- Esau 10y ago
  This is the answer. If you have a problem with the product, don't buy it.
- NicoJuicy 10y ago
  For basic internet access to the general public you need: - broadband - a browser Broadband is by ISP's and a browser is in this case by Apple. And yeah, i don't buy Apple ( obviously). "Add to homescreen" is probably my most used functionality :p .
  - dogma1138 10y ago
    You are confusing the internet with the World Wide Web, Apple does not support Flash do you want to claim that a flash plugin is a human rights issue? Because I can guarantee that the amount of content you cannot access due to lack of flash is orders of magnitude greater than what you cannot access due to lackluster HTML5 support. In fact I can't think of any HTML5 content which you would not be able to view, it might not be formatted properly but it will be accessible.
efdee 10y ago
Calling HTML5 a basic human right erodes the concept of basic human rights. Please don't do it.
briandear 10y ago
Could you argue that developers using HTML 5 are violating human rights because not every browser fully supports it? Developers are fully aware that not every feature is available on every browser -- yet they willingly use those technologies anyway. It's clear we should drag developers in front of a UN Tribunal to account for their willingness to deny the world basic human rights. This has gotten beyond absurd. I can't remember when I voted to make HTML 5 a human right. I can think of a lot more important things that might ought to be addressed (and enforced) first.

cowsandmilk 10y ago

obviously the standards process moves slower than innovation on web technologies, but many of the things that iOS doesn't support are not yet standards. E.g. WebRtc, which Nexedi's link shows had an update to the draft in September, so clearly it is not yet stabilized. The legal basis for requiring compatibility seems much thinner for complying with working drafts (or a working group note, edited August 31, September 7, and September 15, in the case of the webm link). I mean, what level of compatibility should you have with a document that says: > Implementors who are not taking part in the discussions are likely to find the specification changing out from under them in incompatible ways.