Regarding a site I built a few years back, I've been asked "Does the site support HTML5?"
The site was built a few years back using standard HTML.
What is the correct response to a question like this? I thought it was browsers which either support HTML5 or not as they render the script?
This is not really an appropriate question.
But your site will continue to work in browsers that support HTML4 and the doctype you are using. This support is likely to continue for quite some time.
You can easily start to move your site towards HTML5 by adding the HTML5 doctype:
<!DOCTYPE html>
The HTML5 doctype is backwards compatible.
You can read some more here: How to write backwards compatible HTML5?
If your site is valid "HTML4" - there are many flavors - your site will be future proof, even if it is not written in HTML5.
You can test compatibility with the W3C Markup Validation Service
Short answer: Yes - IMO this question is more about will browsers continue to support the HTML4?
However, HTML5 does begin to deprecate some elements / attributes present in HTML 4 and I can imagine a scenario in the future where browsers may begin to also.
Document type support varies betweeen browsers.
You should check the differences between HTML5 specs and your site doctype specs to see if the two are compatible, to mantain it standards compilant.
Anyway the problem is the contrary, a website using new HTML5 features may not be compatible with older browsers not supporting them.
Related
I'm working on a new website, and I want to support as many old browsers and operating systems as possible, as easily as possible. From what I've been reading, I know I'm better off avoiding quirks mode, so I need to decide on the best doctype. And everyone seems to be recommending the HTML5 version:
<!DOCTYPE html>
But according to this website, that also recommends the HTML5 version:
https://hsivonen.fi/doctype/, that doctype will trigger quirks mode in Netscape 6, and maybe in Konqueror 3.2. But this one:
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
won't trigger quirks mode in any browser listed on that website.
So my question is, is there any reason why I shouldn't use the 2nd doctype? I know those are really old browsers I'm concerned about, but I've seen recent statistics saying Netscape 6 is still in use, at least in Russia. And where I live, I still see a lot of people using Windows XP. So while I don't want to spend a lot of time supporting obsolete browsers, I'm wondering if there are any disadvantages to using the 2nd one, other than it's longer and looks complicated.
edit: All the answers and comments posted so far, have been really helpful. Now I'm starting to see that it's a tradeoff between:
1) being semantically correct, and
2) putting more of the very old browsers into standards mode, instead of quirks mode
In most cases #1 is probably more important, since not many people use those really old browsers. And if they do, they're probably used to things looking a little off. But if you're more concerned about things looking better in really old browsers, then #2 could be a better choice.
Anyway, I'll wait a while to see if anyone adds any more answers or comments. Thanks!
edit 2: All 3 answers were helpful. And 2 of them helped me understand specifically what I needed, so I selected one of those. But I would have selected both, if I could have.
The only reason I can think of is that if you want or need to use HTML 5 in the future you'll be able to with more ease already doing everything in HTML 5.
And browsers should have no problem dealing with the fact that it's strict 4.01 and will display it just as if it didn't have the doctype anyways.
Basically from a "what the page looks like" point of view your strict 4.01 will look the same in a html 5 doctype as it will in a strict.
Having said that, it does depend on your HTML there are certain times that you'll need to do it but chances are it shouldn't matter
Really good link for further info on doctype declarations:
http://www.htmlgoodies.com/html5/markup/the-doctype-tag-and-its-effect-on-page-rendering.html#fbid=JCm-bKCUNc6
There are several reasons:
Old browsers(those that doesnt support html5) wont be forever, one day the will be gone but those browsers that can support html5 will take long time in order to be a "old browser". So try to take advantages of all those new html5 feactures.
HTML5 has some new tags that are better for S.E.O
HTML5 Introduced new video codecs that will improve the audio and video experience.
HTML5 introduced a really drag and drop feature!
So what I suggest you is to use html5 and try do your best to make "old browsers" run your html5 website.
I would just use the , but not use any HTML 5 specific features, I think that would work nicely. Older browsers try to render the page as good as they can. In any case, if you DO want to use HTML 5 features, you can always see if they are available in your javascript code or use a framework such as modernizr.
According to me main reason is that :
<!DOCTYPE html>
Html5 : Supports header, footer and section tag. And this tags are easily readable to google for "Search Engine Optimization". So, google takes it as important content on our page.
And for "4.01 strict" :
These header, footer and section tags are not supported.
Features of HTML5 are no doubt very compelling but is it a good time to start development in HTML5 ?
I just have started development in HTML5 and realized at the time even not all HTML5 input types are supported by all browsers. It means it is not sure about basic stuff like input forms.
Please share how you are managing these things ? (Using HTML5 code with browsers currently supporting HTML5)
HTML 5 is still under development so you've got to be careful. Certain features, such as the more basic ones like <header> and <footer>, are less likely to change before the final release. The doctype decleration is unlikely to change. I wouldn't rely on the multimedia support as supported formats vary widely accross browsers.
The momentum behind HTML5 is strong and it is indeed a good time to get started if you have not already.
At the lowest level, you would need to write feature detection in your pages to see if the particular browser supports the HTML5 feature that you want to use.
I suggest the following:
Use sites like caniuse.com to determine the current support for a particular feature across browsers.
Use templates like HTML5 Boilerplate, which give you a structure for the HTML5 page that you can use , with support for various shims that bring in support for HTML5 features in older browsers.
If you prefer doing the detection yourself, use a library like Modernizr.
As with all cross-browser development, you can never rely on any support in the browser. If you target older browsers, then do not rely on HTML5 features. I haven't had problems with using the HTML5 doctype in older browsers, but specific features can be troublesome — e.g. you can use <header> elements, but IE won't let you style them in any way as it disregards header styles as invalid.
As long as you need to support old enough browsers, it will never be a good time to start using HTML5. The only thing that decides whether it's okay to use HTML5 is which browsers you want to support.
HTML5 is much easier then previous ones, It has developed allot in input fields, though its still under development and not complete yet.
You can check here http://html5test.com/ which browser supports HTML5 how much?
Currently, Chrome is the best that supports the HTML5 more than any other web browser.
-Thanks.
Take a look at the table in this wikipedia article. There is a lot of variability amongst browsers as to which parts of HTML5 are currently supported. This website tests your web browser to see which features it supports, so install a bunch of different browsers on your computer and test them for yourself.
I'm designing a small buiness's website, and I'm windering if I should use HTML5 or XHTML1. I know that HTML5 is more advanced, but it is still a changing spec, while XHTML1 is finalized, so there won't be any compatibility issues in the future. Which one should I use?
HTML 4.01 Strict is the best toy to play with. HTML 5 is not ready, and while it doesn't hurt to include some of its features to enhance your site, where they are supported in some browsers and don't cause others to fall over, it isn't worth investing too much time and effort when the spec could still change significantly.
Unless you know that no-one wanting to visit your site will be using any form of Internet Explorer (up to and including IE8), there's no point in worrying about XHTML. You can only serve it as XHTML, so you don't get any of the advantages of the X, you just end up having to jump through more hoops and run with messy code to achieve the same outcome.
There is no big difference, html5 doctype (<!doctype html>) works correctly in all browsers and corresponds to transitional mode in old browsers. If you wonder should you use new semantic tags from html5 than I can say that there is a simple trick to make them works fine in all browsers.
More of my clients lately are asking me about HTML 5 and I'm trying to get a sense of what to tell them. How long until all the major browsers have standard support for it? How long until I leave HTML 4 behind and only code new projects in HTML 5? What are you telling your clients?
Are they asking about specific HTML5 features or HTML5 in general? At my company we haven't said anything to the clients, but we do set the HTML5 doctype as well as using some HTML5 markup - but only markup that works in non-HTML5 compliant browsers. HTML5 doesn't necessary mean you discard older browsers, it depends on which features you implement. You can still use audio and video tags, as long as you keep a flash fallback - as an example. HTML5 form tags are poorly implemented even in bleeding edge browsers, so using them are not an option.
I suggest you read Dive Into HTML5 to see how you can work with HTML5 today, but still support non-HTML5 browsers.
I'll throw in another link; Modernizr is a JavaScript library that come in handy if you want use bleeding edge HTML5 or CSS3 features, it detects support for HTML5 tags and some (all?) CSS3 properties.
You've already gotten some good answers, but I'll chime in as well. I wouldn't give your client a blanket "yes" or "no" on html5. I'd take a look at what all has changed and then break it down into sections based on how well it's supported.
The Doctype:
Nothing is stopping you from switching to the html5 DOCTYPE today. Even browsers that don't understand html5's new tags (most notably IE 6-8) will recognize <!DOCTYPE html> as a valid doctype and not switch into quirks mode. After declaring that your document is an html5 document, you're free to use (or not use) html5's new tags to your heart's content. Personally, I've started using the html5 doctype on websites -- even if I have no immediate plans to use html5's new features -- because there isn't any negative side effect, and as a bonus I don't have to try to remember the correct way to write a doctype and charset everytime I start a new page (which I have to do with html4/xhtml).
New (Layout) Tags:
Next, you have to figure out why your client is interested in using html5 in the first place. My guess is that they're interested because it sounds trendy and cutting edge. In reality, one of the biggest benefits of many new tags (such as <section>, <nav>, <footer>, <aside>, etc) is that they make your code much more readable than it would be if the page was filled with <div>s everywhere. This is a great advantage for the coder (and in the future it might help with accessibility), but right now, this change probably makes very little difference to the client.
New Features (Video and Audio):
Alternative, the client might have specific html5 features that they want their site to use. Two of the most popular are the <video> and <audio> tags. The great thing about these is that you can easily fallback to Flash, so you don't have anything to lose (as far as browser support goes) by using them.
Complex Features:
Other popular new features are <canvas>, geolocation, and local storage (not exactly html5, but related). For these, the fallbacks (if they exist) require a lot more work on your part. If your client really wants these features, you'll need to figure out which browsers they (or their customers and site visitors) are using, and what percent of their target audience they're willing to leave behind.
Conclusion
That got a little long-winded; long story short, I'd tell your client this:
"I'll gladly start using some html5 features immediately. Remember, though, that the specification is not finalized, and it will continue to change over the next 10 years. Around 50-60% of our clients may be using browsers that don't support some of html5's new features, so we'll need to do thorough analysis before adding certain complex features of html5."
If the clients are OK with using the browsers that support HTML 5 for their applications, then why not :)
If they don't want to use the browsers (and versions) that doesn't support HTML 5, then they can't have it, thats what I would say.
Edit:
OK let me put it this way. If they are asking for a suggestion, then ask them what browsers and versions are they comfortable with, if they fall into the area where HTML 5 is supported, then tell them that they can move to HTML 5, adding that its in a nascent state, but support is growing at a good pace.
How long until all the major browsers have standard support for it?
Never. If you look at HTML5 as a whole (which you shouldn't), no broser will ever support it. For each browser, there will always be dozens of features defined in HTML5 which the given browser does not implement.
How long until I leave HTML 4 behind and only code new projects in HTML 5?
The language hasn't changed. It's still HTML. So, you cannot say "I code in HTML 4" or "I code in HTML5". You code in HTML.
HTML5 introduces new features. For each feature, you decide independently if you want to use it in your projects. There is stuff defined in HTML5 that you can use today. On the other side, there is stuff defined in HMTL5 that currently isn't implemented in any browser. The point is, it depends on the given feature.
Another key question is: What browser(s) do the majority of your clients use? Since medium to large size companies tend to be very resistant to changing browsers, what they use now is what they're likely to use for the forseeable future.
For clients using mostly Firefox, the answer is that Firefox supports a good deal of HTML5 now (version 3.6), & even more in version 4 (2011). For clients using mostly IE, they'll have to wait until version 9 (2011).
I'm beginning a very large project in the coming weeks and am trying to decide if I should take the leap into HTML5 land or stick with my time trusted XHTML 1 strict.
The site will be huge. Thousands of pages, video, custom CMS system, lots of social media integration, etc. I'm trying to justify using the new technology, but am unsure (as I've never done a huge site in 5) if everything will go according to plan on older browsers.
I can sit there and talk all day long about the new technology that html5 brings, but when you're sitting in a board room full of execs and the site doesn't work on their IE6 machines...not good.
Let me know what you guys would do. - Thanks
Choosing to use the HTML5 vocabulary is an orthogonal issue to whether to use XHTML syntax. If you want to use HTML5 elements and still work with XML production tools, you can always use XHTML5.
HTML5 is not yet finished so to some extent you will be labelling your documents with a doctype of unknown quantity, and validating it isn't as easy. But if your project is going to be using elements like <video> at any point, using an HTML5 doctype makes sense. (Though hopefully if you are using a custom CMS it should be relatively straightforward to adjust the doctype it spits out in the future anyway?)
None of this is relevant to IE6 compatibility as such. IE6-8 will render the page the same with any of the Standards Mode doctypes, and won't ever render <video> regardless of whether you're using an HTML5 doctype. You will certainly need fallback for any HTML5 extensions you use, such as Flash for <video>. The extended HTML5 semantic elements like <section> or <article>, you don't really get anything for using anyway; avoid them for now.
While HTML5 is not fully complete, much of it can be used today. It was designed with compatibility in mind, so a number of the new elements will work in older browsers, even if they don't specifically support HTML5.
You can start using the new doctype - any browser will recognize it as valid. From there, you can do your layouts using the new semantic structural elements - section, aside, header, footer, etc. You'll need to style these a bit to get them appearing correctly, and there is a shiv script for IE compatibility. It takes a little work, but they provide much more semantic value than the generic div.
audio and video elements have fallback capabilities for older browsers, so by all means use them.
Various new form elements and attributes are not widely supported yet, so you probably won't get much value from them right now. Though I quite look forward to using them, as they will reduce need for client-side scripting a fair bit.
IE6 is the obvious element in the room, but with the right setup, and use of fallbacks in HTML5, there should be no serious issues from using HTML5. CSS is another matter, of course. But IE9 is looking rather good, and will help to raise the bar for standards support.
HTML5 is a better choice here. It offers improvements as well as compatibility; and will render in all browsers. Modern features such as <video> can be sniffed for and replaced by FLV players or other alternative in non-compatible browsers.
XHTML has been redundant since its creation, and XHTML 1.0 (when sent with the correct mime type) doesn't work at all in IE6. Using HTML5, it will both render and be functional, assuming you handle the lack of support of modern features properly.