Jump to content

HTML5: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Hsivonen (talk | contribs)
196 edits
m →New markup: Doctype triggering is not a common term. Doctype sniffing is.
No edit summary
Tag: blanking
Line 1: Line 1:
== Ogg controversy ==
{{future product}}
{{Infobox file format
| name = HTML (HyperText Markup Language)<!-- For rollover expansion of links in other pages-->
| icon =
| extension = HTML5: .html, .htm<br/>XHTML5: .xhtml, .xht, .xml
| mime = HTML5: text/html<br/>XHTML5: application/xhtml+xml, application/xml
| type code = TEXT
| uniform type = public.html
| owner = W3C HTML WG, [[WHATWG]]
| genre = [[Markup language]] [[XHTML]]
| container for =
| contained by =
| extended from =
| extended to =
| standard = http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/
}}


The Ogg controversy section should have its own page. It goes into too much detail that is unrelated to html5. [[Special:Contributions/68.0.127.143|68.0.127.143]] ([[User talk:68.0.127.143|talk]]) 05:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
'''HTML 5''' ('''HyperText Markup Language Version 5''') is the next major revision of the core language of the [[World Wide Web]], [[HTML]]. HTML 5 specifies two variants of the same language, a "classic" HTML (text/html) variant known as '''HTML5''' and an [[XHTML]] variant known as '''XHTML5'''. This is the first time that HTML and XHTML have been developed in parallel.


:I fully agree - if anyone can be bothered, that is. Furthermore, having all that stuff here acts as a magnet for further cruft. First [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=HTML_5&diff=285092886&oldid=285077858 myself], and more recently [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=HTML_5&diff=287406810&oldid=287354467 Hsivonen] have had to remove unsourced and heavily biassed campaign material from this page. This campaign within the W3C process may be important to the future of the web, but Wikipedia is not the place to carry it out.
The ideas behind HTML 5, originally referred to as ''Web Applications 1.0'', were pioneered in 2004 by the [[Web Hypertext Application Technology Working Group]] (WHATWG); HTML 5 incorporates ''Web Forms 2.0'', another WHATWG standard.
The HTML 5 standard was adopted as the starting point of the work of the new HTML working group of the [[W3C]] in 2007.
The working group published the First Public Working Draft of the specification on [[January 22]], [[2008]].<ref name="HTML5">{{cite web
| url=http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/
| title=HTML 5: A vocabulary and associated APIs for HTML and XHTML.
| publisher=W3C
| accessdate=2009-01-28}}</ref> The specification is ongoing work, and expected to remain so for many years, although parts of HTML 5 are going to be finished and implemented in browsers before the whole specification reaches final Recommendation status.<ref name="when">
{{cite web
|url = http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#When_will_HTML_5_be_finished.3F
|title = When will HTML 5 be finished?
|publisher = WHATWG Wiki
|accessdate = 2008-06-14
|work = WHATWG
}}
</ref> The editors are [[Ian Hickson]] of Google, Inc. and [[Dave Hyatt|David Hyatt]], Apple, Inc.<ref name="HTML5"/>


:I have today removed some more detail that was already marked 'confusing'. I reproduce it below in case anybody wants to start an [[HTML 5 Ogg controversy]] page and finds it useful. If you do though, it will be full time work to try and keep it encyclopedic and to stop it becoming a personal blog space for opposing fans.
==New markup==
{{html series}}
HTML 5 provides a number of new [[HTML element|elements]] and attributes that reflect typical usage on modern [[Web site]]s. Some of them are [[semantic web|semantic]] replacements for common uses of generic block ({{tag|div|open}}) and inline ({{tag|span|open}}) elements, for example {{tag|nav|open}} (website navigation block) and {{tag|footer|open}}. Other elements provide new functionality through a standardized interface, such as the {{tag|audio|open}} and {{tag|video|open}} elements.<ref>IBM Developer Works [http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/x-html5/?ca=dgr-lnxw01NewHTML New elements in HTML5: Structure and semantics]</ref>


:Regarding the 'confusing' tag, I didn't add it, but even as a long-term Linux user whose whole audio collection is FLAC, I find the following confusing (without further research):
Some deprecated elements from [[HTML 4.01]] have been dropped for authoring use, including purely presentational elements, such as {{tag|font|open}} and {{tag|center|open}}, whose effects are handled by [[Cascading style sheets|CSS]]. There is also a renewed emphasis on the importance of [[DOM scripting]] in Web behavior.
:#Apple say they "oppose the recommendation" (presumably the now-defunct one that "User agents should support Ogg Theora video and Ogg Vorbis audio") then we give three criticisms only of ''Theora''.
:#Then we go through a process or elimination that seems to come down on the side of ''Vorbis'', noting that it is used by ''video'' game people.


:If there are two Ogg formats under dispute, Theora and Vorbis, then an encyclopedic treatment would enumerate pro and con arguments for ''both'', not con arguments for one, and pro arguments for the other. If there are half a dozen other competing ideas, then they all need pro and con arguments. If there are various interested parties (game producers, game users, software developers, audio and video producers, audio and video consumers, audiophiles and mobile users, web designers etc etc) then each of their points of view re each realistically contending format need to be enumerated ''with [[WP:RS|reliable references]]''. Since this is a constantly shifting argument, and if new formats come into the frame regularly (while others lose support) then maintaining an up-to-date and balanced encyclopedia article at this stage would be, in my opinion, nearly impossible, or rather, a full time job for several dedicated editors. --[[User:Nigelj|Nigelj]] ([[User talk:Nigelj|talk]]) 09:00, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
The HTML5 syntax is no longer based on [[SGML]] despite its markup being very close. It has, however, been designed to be backward compatible with common parsing of older versions of HTML. It comes with a new introducing line which looks like an SGML [[DOCTYPE|document type declaration]], {{tag|!DOCTYPE html|open}}, and enables standards-compliant rendering in all browsers that use “DOCTYPE sniffing”.


'''&lt;snip 'recently removed content'&gt;'''
==New APIs==
In addition to specifying markup, HTML 5 specifies scripting [[application programming interfaces]] (APIs).<ref>[http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/diff/#apis HTML 5 differences from HTML4 - APIs] W3C</ref> Existing [[Document Object Model]] (DOM) interfaces are extended and [[de facto]] features documented. There are also new APIs, such as:
* The [[canvas tag]] for [[immediate mode]] 2D drawing
* Timed media playback
* [[DOM storage|Offline storage database]]
* Document editing
* [[Drag-and-drop]]
* Cross-document messaging
* Browser history management
* [[MIME type]] and protocol handler registration


[[Maciej Stachowiak]] — an [[Apple Computer|Apple]] developer working on [[WebKit]] — described the reasons Apple had for opposing the recommendation, in an [[email]] message posted to the WHATWG [[mailing list]]:<ref name="apple-ogg" />
Some of the new features are part of HTML 5 mainly because there are no volunteers to split HTML 5 and maintain separate specifications of these features<ref>{{cite mailing list |url=http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Oct/0127.html |title=HTML 5 Specification - List of sections and corresponding work estimates |first=Ian |last=Hickson |authorlink=Ian Hickson |mailinglist=[http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/ public-html@w3.org] |date=[[2008-10-27]] |accessdate=2008-12-10}}</ref>.
* Other codecs offer significantly better [[compression]] than Theora; large-scale providers will prefer them to save [[bandwidth]] costs.
* Few — if any — [[hardware]] [[decoder]]s are available for Theora. For mobile usage, software decoding is either unavailable or impractical due to power usage.
* It is theoretically possible for a [[submarine patent]] to exist, possibly waiting for a "deep pockets" (wealthy) company like Apple.
Stachowiak also pointed out that the HTML specifications, traditionally, also failed to specify what referenced formats to use, leaving it to the market to decide.


{{Confusing|date=March 2009}}
==Differences from HTML 4/XHTML 1.x==
The following is a cursory list of differences and some specific examples.
* New parsing rules oriented towards flexible parsing and compatibility
* New [[HTML element|elements]] – <code>section</code>, <code>audio</code>, <code>video</code>, <code>progress</code>, <code>nav</code>, <code>meter</code>, <code>time</code>, <code>aside</code>, <code>[[Canvas (HTML element)|canvas]]</code>, <code>datagrid</code>
* New types of form controls – dates and times, <code>email</code>, <code>url</code>, <code>search</code>
* New [[HTML#Attributes|attributes]] – <code>ping</code>, <code>charset</code>, <code>async</code>
* Global attributes (that can be applied for every element) – <code>id</code>, <code>tabindex</code>, <code>repeat</code>
* Deprecated elements dropped – <code>center</code>, <code>font</code>, <code>strike</code>


There is agreement between the vendors that a "baseline" codec of some form is needed: a codec everyone will be able to access.<ref name="opera-baseline">{{cite mailing list |url=http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-March/010407.html |title=Re: &#91;whatwg&#93; Codecs (was Re: Apple Proposal for Timed Media Elements) |date={{date|Mar 22 2007}} |accessdate=2008-02-25 |mailinglist=whatwg mailing list |last=Lie |first=Håkon Wium | authorlink=Håkon Wium Lie}}</ref> Besides [[Vorbis]] and [[Theora]], [[H.261]], [[H.264]], [[Advanced Audio Coding|AAC]] and [[MP3]] were mentioned.<ref name="apple-alternatives">{{cite mailing list |url=http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-December/013266.html |title=Re: &#91;whatwg&#93; Video codec requirements changed |date={{date|Dec 11 2007}} |accessdate=2008-02-25 |mailinglist=whatwg mailing list |last=Stachowiak |first=Maciej}}</ref> The latter three are unacceptable to Opera and Mozilla on both practical and ideological grounds (they are all covered by [[software patent|patents]]). [[Ogg Theora]] is unlikely to be accepted by [[Apple Computer|Apple]] and [[Nokia]], which leaves H.261 and Vorbis. Unlike Theora, Vorbis is already in use by multiple very large corporations in the video game business,<ref name="ogg-companies">{{cite mailing list |url=http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-December/013274.html |title=Re: &#91;whatwg&#93; Video codec requirements changed |date={{date|Dec 11 2007}} |accessdate=2008-02-25 |mailinglist=whatwg mailing list |last=Parker |first=Conrad}}</ref> and offers quality comparable to AAC. On [[December 12]], [[2007]], Xiph.org published their official statement, objecting to some of the arguments against their codecs.<ref>[http://xiph.org/press/2007/w3c/ December 12, 2007: Xiph.Org Statement Regarding the HTML5 Draft and the Ogg Codec Set]</ref>
==Error handling==
An HTML5 (text/html) browser will be flexible in handling incorrect [[syntax]], in contrast to the XHTML variant of HTML 5 (XHTML5), where such errors must not be ignored. HTML5 is designed so that old HTML 4 browsers can safely ignore new HTML 5 constructs. In contrast to HTML 4, the HTML 5 specification gives detailed rules for [[lexing]] and [[parsing]], with the intent that different compliant browsers will produce the same result in the case of incorrect syntax.<ref name="whatfaq">{{cite web |url= http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ |title=FAQ – WHATWG Wiki |accessdate=2008-02-25|work=WHATWG }}</ref>


'''&lt;/snip&gt;'''
==Ogg controversy==
HTML 5 introduces new ways of inserting [[sound]] and [[video]] in webpages with the <code><audio></code> and <code><video></code> elements. Previously, the specification recommended the use of [[Ogg]] formats [[Vorbis]] and [[Theora]], but this recommendation was later removed<ref>{{cite mailing list |url=http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-December/013135.html |title=&#91;whatwg&#93; Video codec requirements changed |date={{date|10 Dec 2007}} |accessdate=2008-02-25 |mailinglist=whatwg mailing list |last=Hickson |first=Ian}}</ref> after [[Apple Computer|Apple]]<ref name="apple-ogg">{{cite mailing list |url=http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-March/010392.html |title=&#91;whatwg&#93; Codecs (was Re: Apple Proposal for Timed Media Elements) |date={{date|Mar 21 2007}} |accessdate=2008-02-25 |mailinglist=whatwg mailing list |last=Stachowiak |first=Maciej}}</ref> and [[Nokia]]<ref name="nokia-ogg">{{cite conference | first = Stephan | last = Wenger | title = Web Architecture and Codec Considerations for Audio-Visual Services | booktitle = W3C Workshop on Video on the Web, December 12-13, 2007 | date = {{date|28 Nov 2007}} <!-- from HTTP response --> | url = http://www.w3.org/2007/08/video/positions/Nokia.pdf | accessdate = 2008-02-25}}</ref> had opposed the move. [[Opera Software]] and [[Mozilla Foundation|Mozilla]] have been advocates for including the [[Ogg]] formats into the HTML standard<ref>[http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,140408-pg,1/article.html PC World - Mozilla, Opera Want to Make Video on the Web Easier]</ref><ref>[http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/a-call-for-video-on-the-web-opera-vid/ Opera <video> release on Labs - Opera Developer Community]</ref> and have included native decoding for these formats in their browsers.


Comment: they are silly criticisms. Just Apple trying to save its own ass re its own patents and associated technologies. The two main points: (1) Theora can improve its compression. (2) Apple has plenty of time to implement Theora hardware decoders before HTML5 goes mainstream. [[User:Xyz98711|Xyz98711]] ([[User talk:Xyz98711|talk]]) 12:49, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
On [[December 11]], [[2007]], mention of the HTML 5 specification was updated replacing the reference to concrete formats with a placeholder:<ref>[http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=1142&to=1143 html5.org]</ref>
{| class="wikitable" style="table-layout: fixed; width: 75%; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto"
|-
! style="width: 50%" | Original !! Replacement
|- style="vertical-align: top; width: 50"
| User agents should support Ogg Theora video and Ogg Vorbis audio, as well as the Ogg container format
| It would be helpful for interoperability if all browsers could support the same codecs. However, there are no known codecs that satisfy all the current players: […] This is an ongoing issue and this section will be updated once more information is available.
|}

The removal of the Ogg formats from the specification has been criticized by some [[Web developer]]s.<ref>[http://rudd-o.com/archives/2007/12/11/removal-of-ogg-vorbis-and-theora-from-html5-an-outrageous-disaster/ rudd-o.com]</ref><ref>[http://delcorp.org/abbadingo/index.php/2007/12/12/removal-of-ogg-vorbis-and-theora-from-html5-an-outrageous-disaster Abbadingo » Blog » Removal of Ogg Vorbis and Theora from HTML 5: an outrageous disaster]</ref> In response to such criticism, [[WHATWG]] has cited concerns from influential companies including [[Nokia]] and [[Apple Computer|Apple]] over the Ogg formats still being within patent lifetime and thus vulnerable to unexpected future patent challenges.<ref>{{cite mailing list |url= http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-December/013154.html |title=Re: &#91;whatwg&#93; Removal of Ogg is *preposterous* |date={{date|11 Dec 2007 01:34:24 PST}} |accessdate=2008-02-25|mailinglist=whatwg mailing list |last=Hickson |first=Ian}}</ref> A follow-up discussion also occurred on the W3C questions and answers blog.<ref>[http://www.w3.org/QA/2007/12/when_will_html_5_support_soone.html "When will HTML 5 support &lt;video&gt;? Sooner if you help"]</ref>

===Background===
On [[October 17]], [[2007]], the W3C encouraged interested people to take part in a "Video on the Web Workshop", held on [[December 12]], [[2007]] for two days.<ref>
{{cite web
|url = http://www.w3.org/2007/08/video/
|title = W3C Video on the Web Workshop
|accessdate = 2008-06-14
}}
</ref> A number of global companies were involved, submitting position papers.<ref>http://www.w3.org/2007/08/video/positions/ position papers</ref> Among them, Nokia's paper states that "a W3C-led standardization of a 'free' codec, or the active endorsement of proprietary technology such as Ogg … by W3C, is, in our opinion, not helpful."<ref name="nokia-ogg" /> Whether Ogg is proprietary is debatable; while the formats are clearly open, they are designed and maintained by an [[international organization]], [[Xiph.org]]. [[Ogg]] has followed a path similar to many other formats of the [[Internet]] age, such as [[Portable Network Graphics|PNG]] and [[GZip]]. While Xiph.org controls and defines the Ogg format specifications and their reference implementations, it does not own any [[patent]]s and cannot control use of the formats, and the formats are thus not proprietary to Xiph.org.

==See also==
* [[Comparison of layout engines (HTML 5)]]
* [[Trident (layout engine)|Trident]], used by [[Microsoft]] in [[Internet Explorer]]
* [[Gecko (layout engine)|Gecko]], used by [[Mozilla Foundation|Mozilla]] in [[Mozilla Firefox]] and other applications
* [[Presto (layout engine)|Presto]], used by [[Opera Software]] in the [[Opera (web browser)|Opera browser]]
* [[KHTML]], used in [[Konqueror]]
* [[WebKit]], used by [[Apple, Inc.|Apple]] in [[Safari (web browser)|Safari]] and by [[Nokia]] and [[Google Chrome|Google]] (derived from KHTML)

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
* [http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/ WHATWG Current draft]
* [http://www.w3.org/html/wg/ W3C HTML Working Group]
* [http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/ W3C Editor's draft]
* [http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/diff/ Differences from HTML 4]
{{W3C Standards}}

[[Category:Cloud standards]]
[[Category:HTML]]
[[Category:Markup languages]]
[[Category:World Wide Web Consortium standards]]
[[Category:XML-based standards]]

[[es:HTML 5]]
[[de:HTML 5]]
[[et:HTML 5]]
[[it:HTML 5]]
[[nl:HTML 5]]
[[ja:HTML 5]]
[[pl:HTML 5]]
[[pt:HTML 5]]
[[ru:HTML 5]]
[[sv:(X)HTML 5]]
[[tr:HTML 5]]
[[uk:HTML 5]]
[[zh:HTML 5]]

Revision as of 12:49, 27 May 2009

Ogg controversy

The Ogg controversy section should have its own page. It goes into too much detail that is unrelated to html5. 68.0.127.143 (talk) 05:46, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

I fully agree - if anyone can be bothered, that is. Furthermore, having all that stuff here acts as a magnet for further cruft. First myself, and more recently Hsivonen have had to remove unsourced and heavily biassed campaign material from this page. This campaign within the W3C process may be important to the future of the web, but Wikipedia is not the place to carry it out.
I have today removed some more detail that was already marked 'confusing'. I reproduce it below in case anybody wants to start an HTML 5 Ogg controversy page and finds it useful. If you do though, it will be full time work to try and keep it encyclopedic and to stop it becoming a personal blog space for opposing fans.
Regarding the 'confusing' tag, I didn't add it, but even as a long-term Linux user whose whole audio collection is FLAC, I find the following confusing (without further research):
  1. Apple say they "oppose the recommendation" (presumably the now-defunct one that "User agents should support Ogg Theora video and Ogg Vorbis audio") then we give three criticisms only of Theora.
  2. Then we go through a process or elimination that seems to come down on the side of Vorbis, noting that it is used by video game people.
If there are two Ogg formats under dispute, Theora and Vorbis, then an encyclopedic treatment would enumerate pro and con arguments for both, not con arguments for one, and pro arguments for the other. If there are half a dozen other competing ideas, then they all need pro and con arguments. If there are various interested parties (game producers, game users, software developers, audio and video producers, audio and video consumers, audiophiles and mobile users, web designers etc etc) then each of their points of view re each realistically contending format need to be enumerated with reliable references. Since this is a constantly shifting argument, and if new formats come into the frame regularly (while others lose support) then maintaining an up-to-date and balanced encyclopedia article at this stage would be, in my opinion, nearly impossible, or rather, a full time job for several dedicated editors. --Nigelj (talk) 09:00, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

<snip 'recently removed content'>

Maciej Stachowiak — an Apple developer working on WebKit — described the reasons Apple had for opposing the recommendation, in an email message posted to the WHATWG mailing list:[1]

  • Other codecs offer significantly better compression than Theora; large-scale providers will prefer them to save bandwidth costs.
  • Few — if any — hardware decoders are available for Theora. For mobile usage, software decoding is either unavailable or impractical due to power usage.
  • It is theoretically possible for a submarine patent to exist, possibly waiting for a "deep pockets" (wealthy) company like Apple.

Stachowiak also pointed out that the HTML specifications, traditionally, also failed to specify what referenced formats to use, leaving it to the market to decide.

There is agreement between the vendors that a "baseline" codec of some form is needed: a codec everyone will be able to access.[2] Besides Vorbis and Theora, H.261, H.264, AAC and MP3 were mentioned.[3] The latter three are unacceptable to Opera and Mozilla on both practical and ideological grounds (they are all covered by patents). Ogg Theora is unlikely to be accepted by Apple and Nokia, which leaves H.261 and Vorbis. Unlike Theora, Vorbis is already in use by multiple very large corporations in the video game business,[4] and offers quality comparable to AAC. On December 12, 2007, Xiph.org published their official statement, objecting to some of the arguments against their codecs.[5]

</snip>

Comment: they are silly criticisms. Just Apple trying to save its own ass re its own patents and associated technologies. The two main points: (1) Theora can improve its compression. (2) Apple has plenty of time to implement Theora hardware decoders before HTML5 goes mainstream. Xyz98711 (talk) 12:49, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference apple-ogg was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ Lie, Håkon Wium (22 March 2007). "Re: [whatwg] Codecs (was Re: Apple Proposal for Timed Media Elements)". whatwg mailing list (Mailing list). Retrieved 2008-02-25. {{cite mailing list}}: Unknown parameter |mailinglist= ignored (|mailing-list= suggested) (help)
  3. ^ Stachowiak, Maciej (11 December 2007). "Re: [whatwg] Video codec requirements changed". whatwg mailing list (Mailing list). Retrieved 2008-02-25. {{cite mailing list}}: Unknown parameter |mailinglist= ignored (|mailing-list= suggested) (help)
  4. ^ Parker, Conrad (11 December 2007). "Re: [whatwg] Video codec requirements changed". whatwg mailing list (Mailing list). Retrieved 2008-02-25. {{cite mailing list}}: Unknown parameter |mailinglist= ignored (|mailing-list= suggested) (help)
  5. ^ December 12, 2007: Xiph.Org Statement Regarding the HTML5 Draft and the Ogg Codec Set
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=HTML5&oldid=292655114"