SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Results 1 to 25 of 25
  1. #1
    Team SitePoint
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Corrimal
    Posts
    19
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    HTML5 and CSS3 for the Real World

    Notice: This is a discussion thread for comments about the SitePoint article, IE9 and Real-world Solutions.

    What did you think of Louis Lazaris's exploration of what Internet Explorer version 9 can do with HTML5 and CSS3? Does it make you want to take a closer look at IE9 beta?
    Last edited by lilainoz; May 16, 2011 at 23:06.

  2. #2
    padawan silver trophybronze trophy markbrown4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    4,095
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    SVG support is only ever touched on in feature summaries like this. I know you can't cover everything in detail but SVG is one of the most impressive technologies in the IE9 feature stack to me.

  3. #3
    SitePoint Member tantrictami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Thumbs up

    I am going through the sitepoint book about HTML and am really enjoying it. I just wanted to say I am doing the exercises in KOMODO edit, which is a free download for macs, and am able to view and example of the site in firefox as I write the code and I find it very helpful for working through the exercises.

    Great job on the book, keep them comming

  4. #4
    SitePoint Enthusiast TheWix's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    52
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    @Tan, Which book are you talking about?

  5. #5
    SitePoint Member tantrictami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    "Build your website the right way with HTML and CSS"

    I have built about 20 websites with free sitebuilder tools but keep running into the limitations of them. I have gone back and am trying to get the foundation to do things properly. this is the perfect place to start.

  6. #6
    SitePoint Enthusiast ryanqm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    49
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Can you please post its link as well. i also couldnt find it

  7. #7
    SitePoint Member tantrictami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Arrow

    So Sorry for the confusion, here is the link for the book I highly reccommend it!

    http://www.sitepoint.com/books/html2/

    Cheers

    Tami

  8. #8
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The given e book link not working ,plz chk it.

  9. #9
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by markbrown4 View Post
    SVG support is only ever touched on in feature summaries like this. I know you can't cover everything in detail but SVG is one of the most impressive technologies in the IE9 feature stack to me.
    The lack of pimping SVG stems from it being a fifteen year old technology that in terms of web use was first available over a decade ago when the OBJECT tag was introduced.

    But nobody remembers that since Adobe buried their IE plugin for it the moment they bought up Macromedia!

    Much like X11 you need to put a API on top of it for 'normal' people to use it which is why it was effectively stillborn on the browser a decade ago... the old joke, if X11 didn't suck we wouldn't need Motif, GTK+, QT or any of the other frameworks.

    Which is just PART of why there's so much more interest in CANVAS.

    Basically SVG is old tech that nobody embraced the first time around -- which is why calling it part of HTML 5 is just so much bull!

    Though honestly I say the same thing about canvas being part of an HTML specification since the tag itself is useless - I don't even get why we needed a new tag for it since it's functionality is javascript only; at which point it should be added to the DOM via something like addchild instead of having a HTML element for it. You want fallback content, that's what NOSCRIPT is for.

    But that's also another part of my 'issues' with the HTML 5 specifications -- all these other specs that have NOTHING to do with markup being thrown under it's umbrella for no good reason.

  10. #10
    phpLD Fanatic bronze trophy dvduval's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    Posts
    3,627
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Seriously thinking about starting to press forward, and just warn users:
    You need a modern browser to use this web site

  11. #11
    padawan silver trophybronze trophy markbrown4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    4,095
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by deathshadow60 View Post
    The lack of pimping SVG stems from it being a fifteen year old technology that in terms of web use was first available over a decade ago when the OBJECT tag was introduced..

    Basically SVG is old tech that nobody embraced the first time around -- which is why calling it part of HTML 5 is just so much bull!
    There is a growing number of enlightened people who understand what SVG can bring to the web. The browser vendors are actively adding SVG support for a reason.

  12. #12
    Community Advisor ULTiMATE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Bristol, United Kingdom
    Posts
    2,158
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by dvduval View Post
    Seriously thinking about starting to press forward, and just warn users:
    You need a modern browser to use this web site
    I'm all for backwards compatibility, but it's getting to the point where enough is truly enough. Computers are powerful enough to handle most modern browsers now and given the choice I would ditch old browsers and redirect users to a text-only version of a page immediately.

    Sadly, like most others, I work for a company that receives a large number of users from dead browsers like IE6, most likely users at work, and ditching old browsers is like ditching 15-20% of users.

    A few years ago I thought that we'd have ditched IE6 long ago, even IE7...

  13. #13
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by dvduval View Post
    Seriously thinking about starting to press forward, and just warn users:
    You need a modern browser to use this web site
    Welcome to 1997...

    What do I mean by that? Does anyone else here remember the stupid malfing "best viewed in" banners for IE and Netscape?

    We REALLY don't need a revisit to those days. It's funny how it's like every new generation of coders wants to do that all over again.

    But as always those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it... from adopting and deploying specifications before they are out of Draft (basically IE 5.x/6.x all over again) to bloating out sites with "gee ain't it neat" javascript nonsense that does more harm to a sites traffic and usability, to the repeated "advertising can pay for everything" nonsense... it's been done before, it's failed before, and everyone is lining up to do it again.

  14. #14
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    CSS (Cascading Style Sheets) is a method of separating information about web contents format from the content itself. This has several inherent advantages. First off, and most practically, using CSS will allow you/your webmaster to edit the format of your entire website at once instead of changing every individual page when the sites template changes. This will greatly reduce the cost of updating your website. Another benefit of CSS is that formatting code is kept separately from content. This has the effect of raising keyword density and while making you web page easier (hopefully) to parse for search engines. Furthermore CSS is far more versatile than older table-based designs, allowing web designers greater freedom which in turn raises the quality of sites. <snip/>
    Last edited by Mittineague; Dec 2, 2010 at 00:49. Reason: Ahem ....

  15. #15
    SitePoint Enthusiast DPWeb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    32
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    DeathShadow - I'm no "old school" programmer or anything but I understand the basics of a few languages.

    I certainly do not want to see banners displaying "this website works best in XXXXXXX browser." It sounds like that defeats the whole purpose of having compatible languages. Am I wrong?

    The reason I started learning more languages was to make my websites more compatible across browsers. I also wanted to reduce the load time of my pages and reduce the amount of errors.

    I'm pretty sure web development should be about making your website work flawlessly across ANY browser. The mobile age is NOW, your websites should be compatible for all viewing sizes!

  16. #16
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    you all are giving nice reply can any one of you tell me that how can i call css from other file to my website ?

  17. #17
    SitePoint Wizard
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,381
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    For "near" future, I do see potential commercial site taking advantage of HTML 5 technology. The server can detect what browser is running and be able to serve up specific HTML code. So, this would eliminate the banner "Best viewed on...." Of course this would mean maintaining at least two different view sources. In business world, that's more maintanance cost. It would be tragic if HTML 5 won't be adapted for at least another 5 yrs... and sadly... this is probably true...

  18. #18
    Community Advisor ULTiMATE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Bristol, United Kingdom
    Posts
    2,158
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by deathshadow60 View Post
    Welcome to 1997...

    What do I mean by that? Does anyone else here remember the stupid malfing "best viewed in" banners for IE and Netscape?

    We REALLY don't need a revisit to those days. It's funny how it's like every new generation of coders wants to do that all over again.

    But as always those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it... from adopting and deploying specifications before they are out of Draft (basically IE 5.x/6.x all over again) to bloating out sites with "gee ain't it neat" javascript nonsense that does more harm to a sites traffic and usability, to the repeated "advertising can pay for everything" nonsense... it's been done before, it's failed before, and everyone is lining up to do it again.
    I disagree.

    This time we're dealing not just with different browsers, but with out-of-date browsers with poor security; browsers that developers and security analysts unanimously agree should have been put out of commission years ago.

    I'm not advocating the adoption of standards that aren't set in stone, but what I am advocating is the drop of support for browsers that are no longer supported by their developers. I can understand businesses not ditching them just yet, but on personal sites or at client discretion I have opted to display web pages as plain text for IE6 users, with a message at the top of the page stating why their page has no styling. A lot of clients feel the frustration of having to wait longer for a website to be finished because their site doesn't work on a dead browser and more often than not cheaper prices and speedy deliverables make everyone happy.

    In my view, if we don't do this we'll still be developing for IE6 in the next five years.

  19. #19
    SitePoint Addict wardcosbyson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    253
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by markbrown4 View Post
    There is a growing number of enlightened people who understand what SVG can bring to the web. The browser vendors are actively adding SVG support for a reason.
    Glad you brought this one up Mark, it answers my worries. thanks

  20. #20
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    bangladesh
    Posts
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Last edited by Mittineague; Dec 10, 2010 at 01:13. Reason: Please wait until you get your signature for your links.

  21. #21
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    34
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    what is the different between HTML4 (currently using) with HTML5? Curious.

  22. #22
    SitePoint Guru team1504's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Okemos, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    732
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I agree on the svg support, it is pretty amazing.

    I think that HTML 5 and css3 should only be used if one knows how to use them, validate them (nothing vendor-specific, and has failsafes.

    I think css3 should be avoided more however as much as I love it

    Does anyone know where I can find or show me the links where I can follow the updates on cs3 drafts and the plans for features or fixes in future drafts as bulbula did for htmHTML5

    Quote Originally Posted by inblues View Post
    what is the different between HTML4 (currently using) with HTML5? Curious.
    So many things! Some shorter and some longer changes. A 15 character doctype! The ability to include audio and video without plugins
    Here is a list of the new elements & tags:http://www.w3schools.com/html5/html5_new_elements.asp

    Some quick, fun, and helpful references are html5rocks.com and the online book diveintohtml5 ,which is now in print by o'reilly & Google press.

    Have fun with the future of the web!

  23. #23
    SitePoint Guru team1504's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Okemos, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    732
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Found them at the w3c 's website under the dir css3wg

    while exploring somethings, I noticed a lot of revolutionary things and even plans for css4! In fact, there was a draft for the background property in css4

    I believe css3 has been in draft for about 7 years now. So this leads me to ask, when was css2 officially read to use?
    Also how many years since the w3c began drafting it?

  24. #24
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by team1504 View Post
    I believe css3 has been in draft for about 7 years now. So this leads me to ask, when was css2 officially read to use?
    Also how many years since the w3c began drafting it?
    CSS 2 Recommendation - 1998
    http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-CSS2-19980512/

    CSS 2 Working Draft - 1997
    http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-CSS2-971104/cover.html

    That 'previous' section can be real handy on that.

    Of course I'd point out that the latest recommendation is in fact 2.0, since even CSS 2.1 has gone from draft to candidate and back to draft.
    http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-CSS2-20101207

    Hey look, it's back to "working draft" instead of the "candidate recommendation" of the last version:
    http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/CR-CSS2-20090908/

    Gotta love design by committee, bad enough to make one wish we had a benevolent dictator saying "Look, this is how it works, GET IT DONE!"

  25. #25
    SitePoint Guru team1504's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Okemos, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    732
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    thank you for the links

    Quote Originally Posted by deathshadow60 View Post

    Gotta love design by committee, bad enough to make one wish we had a benevolent dictator saying "Look, this is how it works, GET IT DONE!"
    agreed. Then we would not have stupid browsers and there would be no need for js hacks

    so is it safe to assume that css3 will be ready to use fully, I mean including even some of the more recent features they just ffinished drafting in December, by 2012/2013? Or even later this year or later than 2013?

    Regards,
    Team 1504


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •