4 ms·

"For the comments about the web not being ready for HTML5 yet because it is too young: nonsense" Although your personal experience may backup this assumption,

"For the comments about the web not being ready for HTML5 yet because it is too young: nonsense" Although your personal experience may backup this assumption, it simply isn't true when you look at the stats : http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version-ww-monthly-201110-201210 http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser_version-ww-monthly-201110...

napoleond 14y ago
What aspect of HTML5 isn't yet ready for mainstream? JS polyfills make almost all of it possible for the ~4% of global IE7 users (according to the site above... no idea how accurate it is). Just using modernizer, json2.js, and underscore enables about 90% of the HTML5 feature set for IE7. Raphael, excanvas (or whatever) and accepting the lack of drop-shadows/rounded corners in shitty browsers make up the rest. Seriously. 99.9% of the time it's possible to develop in "HTML5" and drop in a few conditional comments that load extra libraries for IE 7.
- jfaucett 14y ago
  maybe it depends on how you view the specs, but I think what most people mean by HTML5 is the full spectrum of new features outside markup that enable app building, ie. filesystem API, Websockets, web workers, webgl, etc, which is to no where near getting a 90% coverage even by using tons of shims/libs. just browse this site to see how far along HTML5 is: http://caniuse.com/ http://caniuse.com/
  - napoleond 14y ago
    Yeah, fair enough, it's a moving target. Two years ago when people said HTML5 wasn't ready for prime time they were talking about audio and video tags, canvas, SVG, CSS media queries, and websockets (which, by the way, are pretty usable with a shim like socket.io or sockJS). Now those things are all more or less feasible across browsers with some (or a lot) of JS (localStorage and the app cache can also be used as long as they're not relied on, which is a reasonable long term strategy for most web apps anyway) but web workers and webgl have picked up steam since then. If we keep moving the HTML5 goalpost (I've given up on paying attention to the spec), it will never be ready for production use. I guess I'm only saying this because the HTML5 brand has created enormous confusion in the marketplace. That's largely because it was touted as "the replacement for Flash" and my point is that it is already quite capable of doing that in most cases.

napoleond 14y ago

What aspect of HTML5 isn't yet ready for mainstream? JS polyfills make almost all of it possible for the ~4% of global IE7 users (according to the site above... no idea how accurate it is). Just using modernizer, json2.js, and underscore enables about 90% of the HTML5 feature set for IE7. Raphael, excanvas (or whatever) and accepting the lack of drop-shadows/rounded corners in shitty browsers make up the rest. Seriously. 99.9% of the time it's possible to develop in "HTML5" and drop in a few conditional comments that load extra libraries for IE 7.

jfaucett 14y ago
maybe it depends on how you view the specs, but I think what most people mean by HTML5 is the full spectrum of new features outside markup that enable app building, ie. filesystem API, Websockets, web workers, webgl, etc, which is to no where near getting a 90% coverage even by using tons of shims/libs. just browse this site to see how far along HTML5 is: http://caniuse.com/ http://caniuse.com/
- napoleond 14y ago
  Yeah, fair enough, it's a moving target. Two years ago when people said HTML5 wasn't ready for prime time they were talking about audio and video tags, canvas, SVG, CSS media queries, and websockets (which, by the way, are pretty usable with a shim like socket.io or sockJS). Now those things are all more or less feasible across browsers with some (or a lot) of JS (localStorage and the app cache can also be used as long as they're not relied on, which is a reasonable long term strategy for most web apps anyway) but web workers and webgl have picked up steam since then. If we keep moving the HTML5 goalpost (I've given up on paying attention to the spec), it will never be ready for production use. I guess I'm only saying this because the HTML5 brand has created enormous confusion in the marketplace. That's largely because it was touted as "the replacement for Flash" and my point is that it is already quite capable of doing that in most cases.