6 ms·

HTML5 must not become the future of the web

14 points by superduper 16y ago

enomar 16y ago
You lost me at "Few people would argue that it (Javascript) is anything other than a half-baked toy language that does not scale well."
- potatolicious 16y ago
  I actually choked on my coffee at that sentence, but I persevered. Another gem: > "There is an alternative to serving up source code that works well in a growing number of situations, eg the JVM, CLR..." Really? I'm not sure how much more "big enterprise" we can get... and having been writing a lot of JS as of late, and a lot of past experience with C#... doing the things you do with jQuery et al using C# would be a gigantic pain in the ass and create a morass of completely incomprehensible, unmaintainable code. I've noticed something in this great big Flash vs. the World debate - the only people defending Flash appear to be Flash developers, and the only real motivation I've seen in the defense of Flash is self-preservation...
  - grayrest 16y ago
    As a long time js developer (started hacking serious js on the Mozilla XPFE in 2001) I'll defend flash for the platform consistency and for providing an initial direction for the WHATWG efforts. I'll also note that Flex is more polished as a platform than anything available in the DOM world. The closest competitors in the thick client space are SproutCore and YUI3, neither of which has a great selection of widgets. Not that I'd start a new project in Flash/Flex, but let's be realistic here.
    - ebiester 16y ago
      There is ExtJS as well.
- kixxauth 16y ago
  People who call JavaScript a toy don't know how to use it. And there are a LOT of them. What JS + CSS + HTML5 are missing is the tools and frameworks that make Flex such a great development platform. The tools will come, and it will not take 12 years. Detractors love to scoff at that number, but we all know that we're never going to let it take even close to that long. If I were Adobe I'd stop fighting it and start building those tools now.
  - thenduks 16y ago
    Adobe says they're on top of that. http://techcrunch.com/2010/05/05/adobe-cto-kevin-lynch-were-going-to-make-the-best-tools-in-the-world-for-html5/ http://techcrunch.com/2010/05/05/adobe-cto-kevin-lynch-were-...
robotron 16y ago
No
WiseWeasel 16y ago
What a short-sighted rant. Of course it's easier to create Flash content than HTML5; it's been around a lot longer. Then, content creation tools will start supporting HTML5, like how Adobe Flash CS5 now exports to HTML5 Canvas, and all that will be forgotten, as it'll just be an extra menu option to choose to be enabled. No need for these Flash "developers" to get their panties in a twist. It'll only hurt a bit.
davnola 16y ago
A misguided and confusing appeal based on misconceptions and untruths. For example, the author suggests that separation of content from presentation using HTML and CSS is not possible because the tag is presentational. On the contrary, emphasis is a semantic (in this instance). The author claims HTML5 will take 12 years to become "fully adopted" when in fact it will be finalized in 2012 and actual production usage is exploding in growth. HTML5 is apparently no good because it only adds "just a few tags". HTML, CSS, and JS are best conceptualized as content, presentation, and behaviour, but the author attempts to fit them together as model, view, and controller. JavaScript is, the author says, a "half-baked toy language that does not scale well" that can never be improved because it is served as source-code to the browser [?] and new versions must be backwards-compatible. Yes, backwards-compatibility slows adoption of updated standards. But, the suggested replacement is a "package-based" system (whatever that is) that can be "text or binary". How does that solve the problem? [Edit: typo]
- megaman821 16y ago
 """For example, the author suggests that separation of content from presentation using HTML and CSS is not possible because the tag is presentational. On the contrary, emphasis is a semantic (in this instance).""" That's the point where I said this guy is an idiot. What exactly does emphasis look like? Bold and Italic are presentational, whereas and are semantic. There is a kernel of truth in there as I often wish CSS let arrange elements independent of the order they appear in the HTML doc.
 - ewjordan 16y ago
 There is a kernel of truth in there as I often wish CSS let arrange elements independent of the order they appear in the HTML doc. ...and that type of thing is probably the source of most of the discomfort that the author feels with the way browser separation of duties happens, even if he didn't express it very well: as general-purpose view frameworks go, CSS is an extraordinarily shitty specimen, completely unsuitable for many tasks - every time you've ever had to alter a line of HTML to make your layout work correctly, you've been staring straight at the heart of what is wrong with CSS. Many things that should be handled exclusively within view code (and would be in a sane project) end up leaking into many other parts of the system. And that's even before you start dealing with browser incompatibilities. I'm not sure that there's any solution, though - yes, we all know it's a terrible setup, but none of us can do anything about it at this point, so we turn to libraries that try to shield us from the complexity. C'est la vie, this is what happens when things evolve naturally under changing needs over a long time...
Detrus 16y ago
I agree about the larger point that limiting the web to one language is a bad idea. There is a serious effort by Google http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1341340 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1341340 to alleviate this issue. With NPAPI that allows plenty of access to the browser, instead of current plugin islands, NaCl could be an excellent option. Not to mention, NaCl has the performance of desktop apps, it erases web vs desktop differences. Hopefully it will also erase browsers, just as browsers largely erased old operating systems.
alanh 16y ago
> So in conclusion, I really do hope that HTML5 isn’t to be the future of the web, for we will have missed a chance to really make the future web great if it turns out to be so. This final sentence perfectly demonstrates the unfounded, poorly-written, wordy wishful thinking of the entire article. Don’t waste your time. - - - He also demonstrates an utter failure to grasp the HTML5 timeline, or why the DOM matters, or that his "alternative" is nothing more or less than requiring all browsers to support a theoretical open-source release of Java applets / Silverlight / Flash / similar. From one of the author's comments: "I do not see the canvas tag and flash as doing essentially the same thing. Rendering text in a canvas tag would be an odd thing to do for example." Ah! Precisely: one would have to add a shiv to allow <canvas> text to be selected and copied, and it wouldn't quite work the same as it would on the rest of the page; text would be anti-aliased differently than system text; etc. Remind you of anything — Flash, perhaps? He's arguing against himself here.
- alanh 16y ago
 FWIW: The crazy font for the headings on http://gowallatools.com/api/ http://gowallatools.com/api/ are done with JS & <canvas>. So it is quite possible to “do” text in Canvas, even selection; but it’s clearly awkward (like Flash). Screenshot in Google Chrome OS X: http://skitch.com/alanhogan/dd8us/highlighting-canvas-text http://skitch.com/alanhogan/dd8us/highlighting-canvas-text
bradgessler 16y ago
The subtitle of this guys blog is "random utterances." This article lives up to that promise.
Supermighty 16y ago
> //HTML5 by itself offers very little as it simply defines a few new tags. // He forgot that HTML5 now defines, in detail, error handling, and adds new APIs for interaction with javascript. Or maybe he's ignoring them. Doesn't sound like he much cares for javascript.
nnash 16y ago
> [...] from the perspective of a web developer, Flash is a true joy to develop with compared with HTML, CSS and JavaScript, so their argument is tempered by the ugly technologies they promote. Haha, ok.
Hovertruck 16y ago
"In practice this separation of concerns is a prestidigitation, as – for example – HTML tags such as form part of the view, for they define appearance and a simple HTML page can form the entire view if one chooses." Wrong. This is what we Web Standards nerds are talking about when we say semantic markup. This is why we stress the use of over . The tag means emphasis. A word of importance that needs to be stressed. It has a default style that is italicized, in the same way that <ul>s have default list-style definitions. The is easily styled through CSS just like any other tag.
drivebyacct 16y ago
I love that almost every comment here has already encapsulated all of my frustration at the content on this article. Thank God because that was a trainwreck and I found my neck hurting after reading from all the head shaking I was doing...

14 points by superduper 16y ago

You lost me at "Few people would argue that it (Javascript) is anything other than a half-baked toy language that does not scale well."

potatolicious 16y ago
I actually choked on my coffee at that sentence, but I persevered. Another gem: > "There is an alternative to serving up source code that works well in a growing number of situations, eg the JVM, CLR..." Really? I'm not sure how much more "big enterprise" we can get... and having been writing a lot of JS as of late, and a lot of past experience with C#... doing the things you do with jQuery et al using C# would be a gigantic pain in the ass and create a morass of completely incomprehensible, unmaintainable code. I've noticed something in this great big Flash vs. the World debate - the only people defending Flash appear to be Flash developers, and the only real motivation I've seen in the defense of Flash is self-preservation...
- grayrest 16y ago
  As a long time js developer (started hacking serious js on the Mozilla XPFE in 2001) I'll defend flash for the platform consistency and for providing an initial direction for the WHATWG efforts. I'll also note that Flex is more polished as a platform than anything available in the DOM world. The closest competitors in the thick client space are SproutCore and YUI3, neither of which has a great selection of widgets. Not that I'd start a new project in Flash/Flex, but let's be realistic here.
  - ebiester 16y ago
    There is ExtJS as well.
kixxauth 16y ago
People who call JavaScript a toy don't know how to use it. And there are a LOT of them. What JS + CSS + HTML5 are missing is the tools and frameworks that make Flex such a great development platform. The tools will come, and it will not take 12 years. Detractors love to scoff at that number, but we all know that we're never going to let it take even close to that long. If I were Adobe I'd stop fighting it and start building those tools now.
- thenduks 16y ago
  Adobe says they're on top of that. http://techcrunch.com/2010/05/05/adobe-cto-kevin-lynch-were-going-to-make-the-best-tools-in-the-world-for-html5/ http://techcrunch.com/2010/05/05/adobe-cto-kevin-lynch-were-...

robotron 16y ago

WiseWeasel 16y ago

What a short-sighted rant. Of course it's easier to create Flash content than HTML5; it's been around a lot longer. Then, content creation tools will start supporting HTML5, like how Adobe Flash CS5 now exports to HTML5 Canvas, and all that will be forgotten, as it'll just be an extra menu option to choose to be enabled. No need for these Flash "developers" to get their panties in a twist. It'll only hurt a bit.

davnola 16y ago

A misguided and confusing appeal based on misconceptions and untruths. For example, the author suggests that separation of content from presentation using HTML and CSS is not possible because the tag is presentational. On the contrary, emphasis is a semantic (in this instance). The author claims HTML5 will take 12 years to become "fully adopted" when in fact it will be finalized in 2012 and actual production usage is exploding in growth. HTML5 is apparently no good because it only adds "just a few tags". HTML, CSS, and JS are best conceptualized as content, presentation, and behaviour, but the author attempts to fit them together as model, view, and controller. JavaScript is, the author says, a "half-baked toy language that does not scale well" that can never be improved because it is served as source-code to the browser [?] and new versions must be backwards-compatible. Yes, backwards-compatibility slows adoption of updated standards. But, the suggested replacement is a "package-based" system (whatever that is) that can be "text or binary". How does that solve the problem? [Edit: typo]

megaman821 16y ago
"""For example, the author suggests that separation of content from presentation using HTML and CSS is not possible because the tag is presentational. On the contrary, emphasis is a semantic (in this instance).""" That's the point where I said this guy is an idiot. What exactly does emphasis look like? Bold and Italic are presentational, whereas and are semantic. There is a kernel of truth in there as I often wish CSS let arrange elements independent of the order they appear in the HTML doc.
- ewjordan 16y ago
 There is a kernel of truth in there as I often wish CSS let arrange elements independent of the order they appear in the HTML doc. ...and that type of thing is probably the source of most of the discomfort that the author feels with the way browser separation of duties happens, even if he didn't express it very well: as general-purpose view frameworks go, CSS is an extraordinarily shitty specimen, completely unsuitable for many tasks - every time you've ever had to alter a line of HTML to make your layout work correctly, you've been staring straight at the heart of what is wrong with CSS. Many things that should be handled exclusively within view code (and would be in a sane project) end up leaking into many other parts of the system. And that's even before you start dealing with browser incompatibilities. I'm not sure that there's any solution, though - yes, we all know it's a terrible setup, but none of us can do anything about it at this point, so we turn to libraries that try to shield us from the complexity. C'est la vie, this is what happens when things evolve naturally under changing needs over a long time...

Detrus 16y ago

I agree about the larger point that limiting the web to one language is a bad idea. There is a serious effort by Google http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1341340 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1341340 to alleviate this issue. With NPAPI that allows plenty of access to the browser, instead of current plugin islands, NaCl could be an excellent option. Not to mention, NaCl has the performance of desktop apps, it erases web vs desktop differences. Hopefully it will also erase browsers, just as browsers largely erased old operating systems.

alanh 16y ago

> So in conclusion, I really do hope that HTML5 isn’t to be the future of the web, for we will have missed a chance to really make the future web great if it turns out to be so. This final sentence perfectly demonstrates the unfounded, poorly-written, wordy wishful thinking of the entire article. Don’t waste your time. - - - He also demonstrates an utter failure to grasp the HTML5 timeline, or why the DOM matters, or that his "alternative" is nothing more or less than requiring all browsers to support a theoretical open-source release of Java applets / Silverlight / Flash / similar. From one of the author's comments: "I do not see the canvas tag and flash as doing essentially the same thing. Rendering text in a canvas tag would be an odd thing to do for example." Ah! Precisely: one would have to add a shiv to allow <canvas> text to be selected and copied, and it wouldn't quite work the same as it would on the rest of the page; text would be anti-aliased differently than system text; etc. Remind you of anything — Flash, perhaps? He's arguing against himself here.

alanh 16y ago
FWIW: The crazy font for the headings on http://gowallatools.com/api/ http://gowallatools.com/api/ are done with JS & <canvas>. So it is quite possible to “do” text in Canvas, even selection; but it’s clearly awkward (like Flash). Screenshot in Google Chrome OS X: http://skitch.com/alanhogan/dd8us/highlighting-canvas-text http://skitch.com/alanhogan/dd8us/highlighting-canvas-text

bradgessler 16y ago

The subtitle of this guys blog is "random utterances." This article lives up to that promise.

Supermighty 16y ago

> //HTML5 by itself offers very little as it simply defines a few new tags. // He forgot that HTML5 now defines, in detail, error handling, and adds new APIs for interaction with javascript. Or maybe he's ignoring them. Doesn't sound like he much cares for javascript.

nnash 16y ago

> [...] from the perspective of a web developer, Flash is a true joy to develop with compared with HTML, CSS and JavaScript, so their argument is tempered by the ugly technologies they promote. Haha, ok.

Hovertruck 16y ago

"In practice this separation of concerns is a prestidigitation, as – for example – HTML tags such as form part of the view, for they define appearance and a simple HTML page can form the entire view if one chooses." Wrong. This is what we Web Standards nerds are talking about when we say semantic markup. This is why we stress the use of over . The tag means emphasis. A word of importance that needs to be stressed. It has a default style that is italicized, in the same way that <ul>s have default list-style definitions. The is easily styled through CSS just like any other tag.

drivebyacct 16y ago

I love that almost every comment here has already encapsulated all of my frustration at the content on this article. Thank God because that was a trainwreck and I found my neck hurting after reading from all the head shaking I was doing...