Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I am looking at HTML5 information at W3. Some of the new functionality seems interesting.
Which browsers support it?
How can I ensure that I am using HTML 5?
Is there a way to be told that "there is an HTML 5 command you should be using" if I use something in HTML 4 or what not?
HTML 5 Canvas is supposed to allow a lot of Flash type functionality no?
AFAIK, webkit-based (safari, chrome, etc.), firefox, opera, and IE 8 support some, not all, of the HTML 5 features. Things like video are inconsistent as Apple/Webkit want H264, which mozilla is against (they prefer ogg or something) because of licensing issues.
Use feature detection and the HTML5 doctype. I'm not well read, but you can read up some here.
Canvas is supported by all browsers -- except IE, but Google provides excanvas to allow IE to support canvas (it's slower than a native implementation). Canvas provides a location to directly draw on the screen.
For some examples of canvas usage see processing.js and Bespin. Canvas is definitely capable for drawing at a decent speed, excluding the useless IE.
There's information in the WHATWG spec itself, look for the browser icons in the boxes to the left of each sections. And there's the Wikipedia page, which should be quite up to date (disclaimer: I do a lot of the maintenance there).
The best guide to HTML5 compatibility I have found (by a mile) is this:
http://a.deveria.com/caniuse/#agents=All&eras=All&cats=HTML5&statuses=rec
A general info and other resources can be found here:
http://prezi.com/vo2ommkmkl_w/
HTML 5 Browser Compatible Charts with detailed info
http://www.findmebyip.com/litmus/
Which browsers support it?
HTML isn’t one thing. Different browsers support different parts of it.
Mark Pilgrim’s Dive into HTML5 is a good reference.
How can I ensure that I am using HTML 5?
http://html5.validator.nu/
Related
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I know this is an opinion based question but I am hoping to dodge being closed because its not a personal taste question.
Which browser should i develop against that will show me that my code is most likely compatible across browsers? In other words, Which browser is the most strict on code? i.e. chrome seems to be the least strict..
My experience recently has been 0 bugs in chrome = 49 bugs in IE. I was wondering if I develop against IE would it be something like 0 bugs in IE = 11 bugs in chrome?
Using one specific browser to try and see how compatible it is with other browsers just doesn't really make sense. You should develop in a modern browser using standards compliance and best practises and then test in all browsers to ensure cross browser compatibility and graceful degradation in older browsers.
Google Chrome and Chrome Canary are widely considered the best browsers to develop with but modern versions of Safari and Firefox are also good.
You should develop for as many browsers as you reasonably can or want to target. Browsers aren't ordered by stringency; they each have their own quirks and oddities when it comes to the standards. So, assuming that something works in one browser (even the "most stringent") doesn't guarantee anything about what it looks like in another.
Standard code will work on any major browser. I develop on chrome and then check it against Internet Explorer. IE used to be terrible at being standards compliant but is much better in recent releases.
If it works in IE 7 or 8 without any IE hacks then it should work everywhere.
Of you use a framework like Twitter bootstrap and jquery then it should look the same in all browsers. And it would be easiest to keep up to date.
Lynx.
It's still in active development. Still has a small user-base. And it doesn't support JavaScript, Flash, images, or video.
If it works in lynx, it works on any remotely recent browser.
If you're not concerned with that level of compatibility, you're generally safe developing for the lowest popular version of IE among your site's visitors, using MDN or some other non-Microsoft reference as your resource (so as to avoid using IE-only features).
Well,
I call it not for nothing Internet Exploder. IE is a major pain in the ass, especially IE7 and 8. If you can get it working there, well lad, than you are ready for big projects.
Besides, check your site stats (with Google Analytics perhaps) and see which browser your users are using.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
In the UI development area there has been lot of emphasis on adhering w3 standards. I have very basic question why the webpages should adhere w3 standards. My specific questions are
(1) What are the top 10 reasons adhere w3 standards?
(2) What are the top 10 issues I will get if I don't adhere to w3 standards even though web page I have developed working fine?
As a web developer, adhering to w3 standards is strongly recommended, simply because browsers implement those standards. Without standards imagine IE 6-7 like stylesheets for every browser out there.
By coding to standards we do our but in giving users accross platform, browsers and screens that will get a uniform experience, that said there are a few things that browsers render differently. But with IE 9, Internet Explorer also started falling in line with other browsers.
Also, there are ton of libraries and frameworks that assume you have valid markup to work properly.
Just a demo, try and remove doctype declaration and open your site in IE.
See this link for info about HTML validation: http://validator.w3.org/docs/help.html#why-validate
I also like their saying WYSINWOG - What You See Is Not What Others Get because it's so true (a lot of the time, at least).
I think the answer to this question could possibly become a list, but the primary reason that stands out for me is compliance.
Your site may look fine to you among the browsers you are able to test on, but if you start to go outside the standards the chances of it working in browsers that you couldn't test goes down.
There's lots of browsers available today on an increasingly broad spectrum of devices with multiple versions available. Its just not possible to test everywhere.
You can validate your webpages against the w3 validator at http://validator.w3.org/
As for WHY keeping your pages up to standards is because those standards are there for a reason.
Your pages work fine for you. Have you tested how the pages look / perform in all browsers? IE 8+, Chrome, Safari, Firefox, Opera, SeaMonkey, etc.? Are you 100% sure your website is handicapped accessible?
When developers adhere to w3 standards, and browsers adhere to w3 standards, then the chance that users will have a consistent experience regardless of what browser they use increases. Visitors who don't have an ideal experience won't return. Adhering to the w3 standards increases the odds in your favor of a visitor having a positive experience, thereby increasing the chances that they will return.
One of the first things I learned when I started developing webpages/sites was to never let the phrase "It works on MY machine" be part of my professional vocabulary (except in jest). It doesn't matter how much a dev likes something or how well they perceive something to work - all that matters is the user's experience. If you have to bend over backwards to make the user's experience enjoyable then so be it - they are the ones who write the checks after all.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I built a site for a small business and it looks great and they love it. Everything is fine up until we notice that older versions of Internet Explorer (8 and older) can't view the site. It looks completely messed up. I used Bootstrap which uses CSS3 and HTML5 elements.
What can I do about this? I don't want to remake the entire website.
You need to use an HTML shiv so older versions can tell what the new HTML5 tags are. For the use of CSS3, you need backup images or something for older versions to fall back on.
html5 shiv
How to use
More current info
HTML5 Shiv IS A MUST FOR OLDER BROWSERS! This is why your site looks crazy. Older browsers don't know what a nav or header tag is so it will not display any of those styles.
It depends... some CSS can be emulated quite nicely with css3pie, check www.css3pie.com.
But if it's not enough, you may have to convince your users to switch to Chrome, Firefox or Safari.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
ive been making a website for a charity i volenteer with and want to check it for browser compatibility so ive been using browser shots website to show me give me images of what the site looks like in diferent browser configurations
my question is how much backwards compatibility should i be looking for ive currently been aiming for the last 5 versions of the major browsers so ie chrome firefox opera and safari is it neesary to make sure the last 5 versions are suported or should i be aiming to make say the last 2 versions or even more compatible the code is most likeley compatible with most versions but some parts like rounded corners in css i know arnt suported so most people with older browsers may not see it corectly should i make it viewable for them or just have a pop up box lil youtube that says your using a older browser for best results use a newer browser and link them to it
We practice supporting IE 6, 7, 8, 9, Firefox 3.6+, Chrome 15+
And we test by using virtual machines with the actual browsers installed.
But its best to look at who is visiting you site, and cater to what they use. I.e. use Google Analytics to see which browsers are you most popular and focus on them first.
It depends mostly on your target audience actually. Non-IE browsers aren't a big problem when going down the versions, so you might notice that even the last 5 versions of them are rendering the page completely, or almost-completely (no major flaws) the same. What you want to take care of is IE. With the current version 9, it's still unbeliveable that some people are still using IE6, but that's a sad truth. You just need to see if it's worth optimizing your website for oldies like that one. A link to a newer version seems like the best solution and there are even some plugins for this that immitate the native IE info toolbars.
Also, be careful with html5 and css3.
UPDATE
See some helpful info here.
Ideally you should use a tool like Microsoft Expression Web SuperPreview. This provides you with a view of your site side by side in your locally installed browsers. There's also a premium service whereby it will compare your site in a complete range of browsers and versions for comparisson.
Try browsershots.org.
It is a nice website that outputs images how your website looks in other browsers.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I know it will be 'finalized/made official' in 2012 (and something to do with it being given 'Recommendation status' in 2022), but I'm wondering if it's a good idea to make a site using HTML5 now.
A simple portfolio sorta site? Given that most users (most people using IE) won't have support for it, although IE9 (shock) will be shipping with support.
There is no one monolithic HTML5. HTML5 is being developed as a single large (oh so very large) document, yes, but that doesn't reflect reality(*).
That is to say, HTML5 is a collection of loosely related incremental improvements to HTML4. Some of those new features are widely implemented already. Some of them you can safely use knowing that they'll degrade usefully for old browsers. Some of them you can use as long as you add explicit fallback code. Some of them will be shutting out some browsers for the foreseeable future. Some of them will only ever have minority support. Some of them may never be implemented at all, or may yet be edited out of the standard. And many new features that are often regarded as being “HTML5” aren't in HTML5 at all, but other standards (CSS3, ECMA262-5, DOM extensions, WebSocket...).
You will have to pick and choose which the features of the New Web you want individually, judging by current and apparent future support. There's not a switch for ‘using’ vs ‘not using’ HTML5, other than merely the doctype itself (which doesn't get you any new behaviour).
*: This was a big mistake, in my opinion. It would have been better to quickly standardise the bits that were already supported by everyone—like HTML3.2 did after the HTML3.0 fiasco (XHTML2, anyone?)—and then add new features in a more modular fashion. But that's not what happened, and it's too late to do much about it now.
It is a good idea to prepare your website for HTML5, but please be backwards compatible to allow users with a browser that is not yet "ready" for HTML5 to be able to view your site, event if that means limited functionality. That way, users with the latest browsers will reap full benefits, but those of us who are not on the bleeding edge will still be able to view content. As you can see, I feel somewhat strongly about this topic, but hey, I'm a realist.
Also, keep in mind that there are technologies like Silverlight and Flash, today, that can support rich functionality, if you want to allows non-HTML5 compatible browsers to also view such content.
There are people that wanna be progressive, those are the ones that bring the change, and I figure your one of them. So my advice would be, sure, cool, use it, just with care that users whose browsers don't support it also have decent experience.
Things that might help:
http://code.google.com/p/html5shiv/
("Public repo for the latest HTML5 JavaScript shiv for IE to recognise and style the HTML5 elements. ")
Also, as new user i can't post more than one link, but look for css3pie:
("PIE makes Internet Explorer 6-8 capable of rendering several of the most useful CSS3 decoration features.")
Once IE 9 is released, all major browsers vendors will support a large subset of HTML5. http://caniuse.com is a very useful site for answering the question "Which HTML5 related feature can I use now (or in the near future)?"
Updated (to address #Crusader's comment):
By some measures the market share of browsers without at least some HTML5 support (i.e. IE 6,7,8) is now lower than 50%. In other words, the era of HTML5 has already arrived.
With the arrival of IE 9 soon, I predict the share of browsers with no-HTML5 support will fall to less than 25% in the next 12 months. And for those who refuse to upgrade (or can't because of corporate policy), Chrome Frame allows easy use of HTML5 in IE 6,7, and 8 for sites that need to support those browsers.
Or consider: the only reason MS is implementing HTML5 features in IE 9 (instead of continuing to put all its eggs in the Silverlight basket) is because they know HTML5 has already arrived and they are late to the party.
Certain bits of HTML5, sure. Almost all new elements introduced in HTML5 can be used already, thanks to the html5shiv, and if you provide a suitable fallback you could be using <video> and <audio> as well. Those, along with the more advanced scripting features (local storage, etc.) are the features that will take time to implement.
Also, while Mark Pilgrim's Dive into HTML5 mostly discusses features that won't be available for some time (at least not in IE, i.e. the majority of web users), the chapter on semantics is both interesting and applicable.
Also keep in mind what your target audience is; if most of your visitors are from the designer community (or whatever), most of them probably have a browser with HTML5 capabilities. WebKit browsers already support much of the HTML5 draft.
The thing you should understand is that html5 is not ONE big thing, it is a lot of bits and parts that you will start to use envtually here is a extract from Dive into HTML5
It’s not one big thing
You may well ask: “How can I start
using HTML5 if older browsers don’t
support it?” But the question itself
is misleading. HTML5 is not one big
thing; it is a collection of
individual features. So you can’t
detect “HTML5 support,” because that
doesn’t make any sense. But you can
detect support for individual
features, like canvas, video, or
geolocation.
You may think of HTML as tags and
angle brackets. That’s an important
part of it, but it’s not the whole
story. The HTML5 specification also
defines how those angle brackets
interact with JavaScript, through the
Document Object Model (DOM). HTML5
doesn’t just define a tag;
there is also a corresponding DOM API
for video objects in the DOM. You can
use this API to detect support for
different video formats, play a video,
pause, mute audio, track how much of
the video has been downloaded, and
everything else you need to build a
rich user experience around the
tag itself.
If you are really interested you will find this very interesting!
Realize that html5 is a blanket term. Using the doctype is just the start. I wouldn't start including advanced webkit animations in all your sites, but using border-radius and box-shadow will work with most(minus ie) browsers and degrade gracefully.