HTML5Wow

[primigenus]

What's with the negativity in here? This is a slide deck that was used by speakers at Google IO in 2011 to present a session about HTML5. They figured it may be useful so they shared it online so attendees and people who couldn't make it could see and play with the slides afterwards. It makes no sense to criticize these slides for not working in Firefox, Opera, on mobiles, or any other use case for which they were not developed. It's a slide deck. Be glad these guys felt like sharing their knowledge with you.

[mediumdeviation]

It's a set of slides about HTML5 written in HTML5. The slides not working properly on mobile devices with no fallback for non-webkit browsers show that the developers are either

a. Lazy b. Incompetent, or c. Used proprietary webkit technology,

none of which will inspire much confidence in the actual contents of slides (which I can't read anyway, since I'm on Opera Mobile)

[krzyk]

It works on my Firefox (19.0a2) almost without errors. The only one I see is not working correctly back button.

[Zash]

    You are running a Mozilla browser. [...], this presentation has only been tested using WebKit browsers such as Google Chrome or Safari.

sigh Didn't people learn when it was "This has only been tested with Microsoft Internet Explorer version 6.0" ?

[robmcm]

They have a presentation about what's coming in HTML5 at a Google dev con and you are surprised they didn't go to the effort to make it work in browsers that, at the time, may not have even supported these features?

[indubitably]

Seriously. Google is doing what it can to snuff out Firefox.

[zobzu]

That's such sites which tip you as why HTML5 is not the synonymous of "proper, standard HTML implementation" anymore.

"You are running a Mozilla browser. While such browsers generally have excellent support for HTML5 features, this presentation has only been tested using WebKit browsers"

Exactly. What you mean here is webkit-HTML.

A big part of HTML5 is "we're saying this is going to be an HTML5 API and thats it".

For example, Firefox and Chrome have different Audio APIs. How that's standard?

[magicalist]

No, what you have here is a slide deck about standard or standards-track features that includes features that don't all work cross-browser yet, and may change significantly before they do. When people respond like this to slide decks, I always wonder what they would have preferred? A video of the presentation, but no live version? Screenshots of the working draft text of the spec?

This is a slide deck for developers. It explicitly says what browser it currently works in and where it might break. Developers usually have more than one browser installed, which makes this not that big of a deal. It does highlight explicitly, however, that developers will then have a choice to make if they want to use those features and want them to work cross browser. They will either have to work to implement (or find an existing) cross-browser polyfill, or they will just have to be patient while the feature is specced and implementations deploy.

There is tension here, admittedly, because eager developers will always push new features that aren't available universally yet, because it allows them to do something new. This is why, for instance, in some cases Mozilla has moved away from vendor prefixing to instead exposing some proposed features in only alpha and beta builds, so that developers won't be tempted to use them in production (which means breaking changes in a spec will break already deployed websites) until the spec is settled. This hopefully will be picked up by other browser vendors (though, again, only for some features). I know some Chrome developers have been very receptive to this approach.

In the meantime, it's good to educate yourself (as a developer) and others about what is coming, especially because while something is still coming (and not here yet) you can still go join a w3c/whatwg mailing list and give feedback.

For instance, you could start with your Audio APIs question by looking to the Audio Working Group:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-audio/

http://www.w3.org/TR/webaudio/

[doublec]

> For example, Firefox and Chrome have different Audio APIs. How that's standard?

This came about because both browsers implemented an experimental audio API to start discussion on what an audio API should look like. Since then a W3C group has been pounding out a standard API and browsers are working towards it.

[cmwelsh]

If I recall correctly, the standards process itself requires multiple competing implementations for a single one to be chosen as a standard. Having multiple versions of a feature or API is therefore a "good thing" for getting new HTML5 features approved as part of the standard.

[brianwillis]

If you used this many gratuitous visual effects in a Power Point presentation I'd think you were an idiot with no sense of taste, but because it's being rendered in a web browser I think this is impressive for some reason.

[ryanbraganza]

Personally, I think a lot of it is impressive, but the cube animation gets old really fast.

[ergo14]

A HTML5 presentation that works only in Webkit. No thanks, I am not interested.

Web and HTML5 is about standards, and my life would be easier if IE would not do the things it did in past, now I'm seeing the same from Webkit.

[vrdabomb5717]

It only seems to work on Chrome right now. Safari doesn't support the FileSystem API, so it doesn't seem like even Webkit's enough.

[hayksaakian]

Nope

http://www.imgur.com/B19Rk.png

No right arrow key means that even if I can use 2/4 of those html5 features, i can't use your presentation.

[hayksaakian]

And on my netbook, I don't even see the arrow prompt because the page is too large by default. I have to zoom out.

http://imgur.com/CxOVj

[jQueryIsAwesome]

The mobile browsers should allow to use the keyboard anytime and just send the events to the current focused DOM tag like any desktop browser does. Maybe as an another option in the browser menu.

[md224]

I think everyone should keep in mind that this presentation was (seemingly) created in 2011, so a couple things might be out of date (e.g. BlobBuilder is now deprecated).

[Tloewald]

Apparently to experience the wow i need to hit a cursor key.

[hcarvalhoalves]

Everything looks great, other than the fact I'm still forced to use a broken language to interact with shiny new APIs:

https://gist.github.com/4471029

Then you want me to manipulate binary data with an array implementation this crappy?

[shimms]

So it uses lexicographic sort by default, just pass a custom comparator no?

https://gist.github.com/4471254

[reaclmbs]

Arrays in JavaScript are instances of the Array object

Two different instances are not equal to each other

[debacle]

Google is doing the Internet no favors in trying to out-douche Microsoft in the web browser arena.

[acron0]

I am on the verge of breaking ground on a large-scale corporate project in which WPF/XAML is the tech of choice for UI. I have received criticism for even suggesting that HTML5 is "up to the job" but I feel like this completely validates my point.

[huhtenberg]

You'd feel differently, if you'd see how slow this presentation runs on my super-duper (seriously) laptop.

[ck2]

I hate that we are back to the days of "works best on xyz"

Firefox ran it just fine.

[bestest]

"press → to move on"? Seriously? I want to use my mouse.

[est]

it seems that javascript now has global variables

    PERSISTENT = 1
    TEMPORARY = 0

[recoiledsnake]

Gah, I would pay HN monthly if someone tagged all such links [Best Viewed in Chrome-only] instead of me clicking through and fiddling with various things. As an Opera user, such kind of links are very prevalent on HN.

Or maybe it was just my fault for clicking on something with "HTML5" in the title.

[Roybatty]

So is WebGL part of HTML 5 because Mozilla and Google are implementing it? Would Google Native Client https://developers.google.com/native-client/overview be part of "HTML5" if Mozilla was implementing it?