Notice: This is a discussion thread for comments about the SitePoint article, Yes, You Can Use HTML 5 Today!.
Please note that one of the illustrations has been incorrectly redrawn; it shows a POST element which doesn’t exist; it should be ARTICLE.
I’ve emailed to ask for it to be redrawn but I guess it’s night time for Sitepoint who are Aussies.
bruce (author)
HTML5 simply explained might tempt me to dip my toe into the water and try using it.
well, browser compatibility difference is still annoying until now, look forward for a grand unification
I better start learning my HTML4 now…
I can’t believe that Opera is leading the way with this. I tried it it Chrome, and yes, a lot of it doesn’t work. Opera: unbelievable. It’s kind of as if HTML5 attempts to re-clain back some basic tasks that we have used JavaScript and CSS for. That calendar thing rocks!
I think we should all start preparing for HTML 6, by the way is HTML1 defunct?
If you want to use new features first - whether it’s a browser design feature, or an implementation of an HTML or CSS feature, the odds are that Opera will have it way before anyone else even contemplates it.
it’s just a shame that so few people are prepared to give it a try, and spend five minutes learning how to use it…
I can’t believe that Opera is leading the way with this.
Really? They’re kinda known for being a forwards browser : )
Which is the very best possible reason not to do it.
I agree partially with you on this point, when these big guys take control over it, then that’s when the next big thing is on the horizon. Question is, what is it?
LOL, apparently Apple and Google want you to start using HTML5 NOW!!!
Awesome help. Just what I was after, have been wondering for a while if I can start using HTML5 now!
Why does the webforms demo not work in Chrome. Doesn’t Chrome already support HTML5? - Arunabh Das
Luckily we’re workaholics* and committed to being super-responsive …
Sorry for the error, Bruce, diagram is all fixed now.
*Not really a workaholic, was just checking mail before going to bed and saw this. 
Interesting, although not exactly practical for the time being.
I really don’t get the article, all it covers is the more generic aspects of HTML5, of course you could do like Google and use HTML5 inline with web applications however for the average web developer, why would you implement a draft specification (as per the article) just to gain a few more semantic tags to structure your content. At the present time it isn’t remotely worth the average individual moving across as while you gain some semantics (which arent giving much benefit), you are loosing graceful degredation, which is more important.
Tommy Olsson described it as “an abomination … it mocks everything I consider important on the Web.”
The article seems to be another ‘what html5 offers’ topic
I do like http://www.sitepoint.com/examples/html5_0709/html5-forms-demo.html
the new enhancements to form fields…
Now using html5 anytime soon wouldn’t be practical…
Also to note:
<!--[if IE]>
<script>
document.createElement("header");
document.createElement("footer");
document.createElement("nav");
document.createElement("article");
document.createElement("section");
</script>
<![endif]-->
Even though this might make ie behave, the spacing issues for the elements seems to be pretty buggy.
Also, now since there can be multiple h1’s on a page, what can dictate the most important heading on a page?
The h1 that is least nested in section/ article/ aside/ nav elements is the most important on the page.
@cooper.semantics,
Let’s look at a theoretical header structure in a document from today:
h1
h2
h3
h3
h2
h3
h4
In this structure, you’d say the h1 was most important, but which heading is second? Probably the first h2, so we have our first clue: priority == precedence.
But, looking at it another way, the h1-6 headline structure only makes sense in the context of a single coherent document – it echoes the outline of the article.
But web pages today aren’t the single coherent document conceived of when the h1-6 hierarchy was invented. Instead they are collections of articles, ads, widgets, etc., that don’t fall easily into the old hierarchy. Instead of an academic treatise, web pages are now pages of a newspaper or magazine. The structure of the headings on the page, beyond perhaps the h1, is completely arbitrary. For example, if we decide all article headlines will be h2’s to indicate they are equal below the page’s h1, and widgets have h3’s, we break the outline structure implicit in the h1-6 hierarchy, by having h3’s with an h2.
Each item on the page really should have a right to its own h1, the starting point of its own outline, independent of the other items on the page.
Currently, we try to indicate priority by crapping on logical story structure in the name of page layout (thereby letting presentation issues dictate story structure, something most of us claim to be against). HTML5 reverses that paradigm, and allows us to maintain logical story structure for each of the several stories on the page, and leaves it to us to imply priority as best we can by precedence in the file.
Personally, I like having the choice. Since no one is forcing me to write one style or the other, if it’s important to me to maintain the logical structure of the content, I can write that in HTML5, and for those times I think I need to break that for presentation reasons, I can write that as well (multiple h1’s are only legal, after all, not mandatory). Either way, I win. ;{>}
Each item on the page really should have a right to its own h1, the starting point of its own outline, independent of the other items on the page.
A document must have a shared relationship throughout and not exclude other parts, thus having one h1 is all we need… A document needs one main headline indicating the nature of the article below it…