8 ms·
HTML5 Peeks, Pokes and Pointers
- mildweed 16y agoFYI: Article has nothing to do with memory pointers or linked list peeks, and everything to do with DOM attributes of HTML5 elements and attributes.
- philwelch 16y agoYes, my mind was blown for a second and then I was slightly disappointed. ("Poke" and "peek" are also commands to write to and read from a given memory address, respectively.) It's presumably a reference to old time tables of "peeks" and "pokes" showing what each memory address controlled, or somesuch.
- ugh 16y agoHere is what it says in the credits (scroll down): Inspiration: Beagle Bros “Peeks, Pokes and Pointers” chart for Apple ][ (+) (+) links to this: http://www.lazilong.com/apple_II/bbros/ http://www.lazilong.com/apple_II/bbros/
- MarkPilgrim 16y agoHere's the story about the name: I wrote http://diveintomark.org/archives/2010/01/29/tinkerers-sunset http://diveintomark.org/archives/2010/01/29/tinkerers-sunset earlier this year, decrying the lack of "tinkerability" of the iPad and similar closed devices. "There won't ever be a MacsBug for the iPad. There won't be a ResEdit, or a Copy ][+ sector editor, or an iPad Peeks & Pokes Chart." One of the common refrains in the comments was that the iPad includes top-of-the-line support for a perfectly open, tinkerable platform: the web. Thus, the "HTML5 Peeks, Pokes and Pointers" chart was born. Also, I just purchased a real live physical original Beagle Bros "Peeks, Pokes and Pointers" chart to hang up in my mancave^Woffice. Next to my Apple //es. Plural. So there's that.
- olefoo 16y agoFond memories of the Beagle Bros. poster that hung on the wall next to the Apple ][ 's in my high school's computer lab.
- godDLL 16y agoIs this a chart of individual tests for "HTML5" feature support, so that you could start using them today (providing graceful degradation)? Why, yes it is. Does it say so anywhere on the chart? Let me check…
- dstein 16y agoEveryone's so hyped up about HTML5. And yet I am slowly coming to the realization that the W3C has made a very, very, grave error in not going ahead with XHTML2.
- pistoriusp 16y agoWhat do you find troubling? Even when XHTML 1.1(?) Was the hype around town I couldn't see the value in using it over traditional HTML 4.
- chc 16y agoWhy is that?
- jacobolus 16y agoThe W3C did go ahead with XHTML2. And everyone else, most notably the browser makers, realized that with such a broken W3C as would create such a monster, they’d have to make a new spec themselves if they wanted it to be reasonable... whence WHATWG and HTML5. Years later, XHTML2 abandoned by the world, the W3C decided it no longer wanted to be sidelined, and it begged for the HTML5 spec to be brought back under its purview. So that’s where we are now.
- dstein 16y agoHTML5 basically takes HTML4 and adds 3 tags: audio, video, canvas. These solve very specific issues, sound, movies, and drawing. HTML5 does not address some larger scoped problems related to HTML -- the biggest being that HTML sucks. It has always sucked, and it needs to go. It needs to be replaced with flexible, programmable XML.
- rimantas 16y agoThere is much more to HTML5 (or to HTML4 for that matter) than three elements (those are elements, not tags). You can have your XML with XHTML or HTML5 XML serialization. Oh, but that does not solve the "flexible" part, right? Well, you have to choose there — either flexibility or interoparatibility. HTML5 focuses a lot on the latter. What do you want? To have any arbitrary element in your markup? Ok, you get your <foobar>barbaz</foobar>. And then what? What should it mean to everyone else beside you? What do you gain by that?
- philfreo 16y agoWhat I want to see is a drop-in JavaScript library that makes many of the new HTML5 elements, attributes, etc. backwards-compatible with all common browsers starting with IE6. E.g., I want to say <input type="text" placeholder="What is your username?" /> and have a script that detects if the browser supports the placeholder attributes, and if not, simulates it transparently. I'd happily understand/accept if this script was limited, so long as it had good clean documentation of what it supported (like placeholder).
- jsdalton 16y agoModernizr (http://www.modernizr.com/ http://www.modernizr.com/) is as close as you're going to get at the moment. It's pretty solid.
- philfreo 16y agoThis is actually specifically NOT want I want: "Modernizr does not add missing functionality to browsers; instead, it detects native availability of features and offers you a way to maintain a fine level of control over your site regardless of a browser’s capabilities." I understand that not all HTML5 features can be reproduced in JS, but for the ones that can (such as "placeholder"), I don't want to have to think about reimplementing it for older browsers when it could be done automatically.