Member Avatar for SKANK!!!!!

will some things not work on my site once html5 is out?
is html5 already out?
please ive been to the google search results for html 5 related material and i really dont understand what it is.
any help from anyone that understands it would be preferred!

  • 11 Contributors
  • 60 Replies
  • 590 Views
  • 1 Month Discussion Span
  • Latest Post Latest Post by unlimited071

Recommended Answers

All 60 Replies

Member Avatar for almostbob

html5 is aidea and will probably not be released, xhtml supersedes it in ability
even if it is releaseed, as long as the dtd of your pages is properly declared, the browser will display them properly

Member Avatar for SKANK!!!!!

oh well i dont use dtd ever and well, i thot that apple did something that had to do with html5?

Member Avatar for almostbob

dtd doctype declaration the first line of an html that works crossbrowser <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd"> without a dtd many of the functions available in html > 2 (for html4) will not be available even if coded into the site
by the time html5 is finished, they might as well call it html6

Apple:: 30 years on;; still insignificant

Edited by almostbob because: n/a
Member Avatar for SKANK!!!!!

dtd doctype declaration the first line of an html that works crossbrowser <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd"> without a dtd many of the functions available in html > 2 (for html4) will not be available even if coded into the site
by the time html5 is finished, they might as well call it html6

Apple:: 30 years on;; still insignificant

sorry, but im afraid dtds are a thing of the past hon!

Member Avatar for almostbob

reread the specs on html4 html5 xhtml
DOCTYPE is retained as a "mostly useless, but required" header only to trigger "standards mode" in common browsers"
its the keyword "required" that has the effect, you may not use dtd, thats your choice, but run your site through browsershots, to see the effect that choice has on users other than yourself, users with other browsers, to see if the site even displays,
without a dtd the site fails any validation
serious code errors may cause sites to fail to display in some browser/OS combinations

Member Avatar for SKANK!!!!!

reread the specs on html4 html5 xhtml
DOCTYPE is retained as a "mostly useless, but required" header only to trigger "standards mode" in common browsers"
its the keyword "required" that has the effect, you may not use dtd, thats your choice, but run your site through browsershots, to see the effect that choice has on users other than yourself, users with other browsers, to see if the site even displays,
without a dtd the site fails any validation
serious code errors may cause sites to fail to display in some browser/OS combinations

no, believe me. i work in firefox and its not required tos ay the least. im just really happy u dont understand! I feel like im the diamond in the rough!

Member Avatar for diafol

im just really happy u dont understand! I feel like im the diamond in the rough!

Maybe, but you sound daft - no offence.

Web standards require a DTD. I don't understand why you don't just slap in a DTD? Pages won't validate without it either. Although there are a hundred ways to skin a cat, web standards / guidelines are there for a reason. For you to say "I know best"... well, let us say "each to his own". I just hope you never code a site for anybody I know.

Edited by diafol because: n/a
Member Avatar for SKANK!!!!!

Maybe, but you sound daft - no offence.

Web standards require a DTD. I don't understand why you don't just slap in a DTD? Pages won't validate without it either. Although there are a hundred ways to skin a cat, web standards / guidelines are there for a reason. For you to say "I know best"... well, let us say "each to his own". I just hope you never code a site for anybody I know.

my code is perfect. my site is the best site ever.

Member Avatar for diafol

Fair enough.

Member Avatar for Kaycy

I believe I am using HTML 1. Should I be using an updated version?

btw, self taught in basic HTML 1 so I have a brain that just wants to learn more about web developing.

Thank you for your answer in advance.

Member Avatar for almostbob

as long as (despite other opinions) the code is valid and consistent, html 2 3 4, are still perfectly understood by browsers
html4 is more capable than html2, html5 neagates the need for flash(supposedly), if the features arent required, the change is unneccessary
these standard compliant test beds may assist you

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.yoursite.com&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0 html check
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.yoursite.com&profile=css21&usermedium=all&warning=1&lang=en CSS check
to ensure that the code is compliant, invalid code may cause browser/OS combinations to fail to display
http://www.browsershots.org/ will show any browser that your code does not work in.

Member Avatar for drjohn

no, believe me. i work in firefox and its not required tos ay the least. im just really happy u dont understand! I feel like im the diamond in the rough!

The fact that you had to ask about html5 and the things you asked show that your knowledge of doctypes (and a few other things) is severely limited, and you probably haven't heard of quirks mode.

Perhaps you haven't viewed your site in IE to see how the most widely used browser displays it.

Perhaps you cold give us a link to your site, to impress us?

Edited by drjohn because: n/a
Member Avatar for SKANK!!!!!

The fact that you had to ask about html5 and the things you asked show that your knowledge of doctypes (and a few other things) is severely limited, and you probably haven't heard of quirks mode.

Perhaps you haven't viewed your site in IE to see how the most widely used browser displays it.

Perhaps you cold give us a link to your site, to impress us?

everytime i post SNIPPED i get a mod warning.

Edited by happygeek because: link snipped
Member Avatar for almostbob

Skank, test results for your siteFixed size text is invisible in Hi_Def monitors. 10px is, for current generation monitors 0.08inch hi, next gen will be smaller, this laptop has 120px/inch
fixed width body pushes content offscreen in part windows or small devices, looks ridiculous in widescreen

these standard tests may assist you

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.socialemo.com/&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0 html check, failed
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.socialemo.com/&profile=css21&usermedium=all&warning=1&lang=en CSS check, failed
http://demo.opera-mini.net/demo.html?www.socialemo.com/ handheld, displayed, not readable
http://browsershots.org/http://www.socialemo.com/ other browsers, failed, blankscreens out the wazoo

serious code errors in the w3c validator sites will produce blankscreens in browsershotsValid code does not ensure the site will work ...
Invalid code ensures the site will not work ..... in all browser OS combinations

not all layouts work in handheld devices
strictly code based, That is what you call 'best' ?

Edited by almostbob because: n/a
Member Avatar for Kaycy

Thank you for your post, almostbob. I will check out those sites. I told my husband that I joined this community, he is a programmer and all around computer geek and he said it isn't that I'm using HTML1 but that my knowledge of newer techniques these days are unfamiliar to me. That's what lead me to this site. The search for knowledge. :)

Member Avatar for almostbob

Kaycy,
(this is a slack lazy answer, but it works)
sometimes the easiest way to learn html is to install an IDE
(integrated development environment)
set the ide to whatever language you want to learn, and just begin typing
many have code completion functions so they
ensure the closing tags are always put in, if you forget
ensure that block elements arent inside inline elements (inline inside block is ok)
hint at the next element when what you are doing has required code
highlight syntax errors,
and have good helpscreens
you can swap from code view to a view of the page result

PureGeek:- code in a text editor because they can see output, but that takes practice
have no idea what is a good basic IDE to use, I use notepad++
(not at PureGeek level, notepad++ has code completion and hinting but doesnt have a visual display)
run code you end up with through the W3c validators, and follow any suggestions to correct errors (the site does not have to be live)

something I put in the bottom of every

Valid code does not ensure the site will work ...
Invalid code ensures the site will not work ...
.. in all browser OS combinations

Member Avatar for SKANK!!!!!

sorry, u must be uninformed or something. it looks good in all major browsers. noone uses any browser except firefox, chrome, and ie/safari.

its not made for cellphones. impossible to have nice layout when working for cellphones because cellphones arent optimized for the mweb good enough yet! not to mention, i have a widescreen laptop it looks perfect. my brother has a widescreen pc, it looks really stretched, as does every website on that computer.

i dont understand what u mean about this high definition viewage thing? doesnt make sense. care to actually explain more?

Member Avatar for diafol

Ha ha ha. Well done Skank - hilarious! Before I saw your site, I thought you were serious! AB - you must admit - he had you going there - he's been pulling your plonker the whole time (and mine!).

A lesson to us all.

Member Avatar for almostbob

Skank
on your own screen that text may be readable
on a screen one generation newer than your the text is small, more pixels per inch, fixed pixel size gets smaller
on a screen two generations newer than yours the text is tiny
next gen smaller still
best practice for screen layout uses em or %, not px,
em & % are scalar dimensions that adjust to user settings, device capability, window and screen size.
ensuring the page looks the same and functions properly on all resolutions and device capabilities.
It is relatively simple to produce a page that works on all devices from handheld to huge wallscreens

Most properly coded sites work in cellphones pda laptop palm etc
this is a palm touch sitting in an airport cafe 3inch screen, DaniWeb functions because CSGal did produce a functioning layout
(menus push offscreen right till you need them, posts occupy screen left)

Your site,
this is not intended as a personal attack,
a criticism of the code,
is ineffective.
800px wide central column,
on a 400px monitor or
on a 2400px monitor, looks ridiculous wastes real estate
in %, example coded at 80% on your 1024*768 home pc
would remain
80% of 2400px
80% of 400px palm
80% of 800px 'grannies desktop'
with 10% each side of margin/background
the page would look like it belongs on every screen resolution it was displayed on
likewise text sized in em or %, adjusts to the settings of whatever screen it displays on
1 em :-
on this handheld is 8px
on the laptop 12px
on the desktop 14px
on the wallscreen is 72px

If the page is to have a layout, that appears as you intend on every accessible device, regardless of browser/os/manufacturer, compliant code is the only way that works

I looked up your other posts
You write "I only use a doctype because on couple pages it doesnt work without it" (rough quote)
that's what everyone else in this thread is trying to tell you.

Compliant code works
noncompliant code fails,
failure is unpredicatable, browser Quirks modes differ widely even between versions of the same browser
failure occurs at the time that does the most possible damage

Just in case you are serious.

Edited by almostbob because: gunn give you the benefit of the doubt, you might be serious
Member Avatar for Kaycy

something I put in the bottom of every

Valid code does not ensure the site will work ...
Invalid code ensures the site will not work ...
.. in all browser OS combinations

That is so very true! LOL I use Dreamweaver. I used to use something else, don't remember what it was now, since it was so long ago. I find myself working in the editor more than in the visual part of it. Just used to seeing the code and working from there.

I also have it set to code coloring and highlighting any of the errors. That helps a lot.

Here are a couple of my web pages so you can see that I have some knowledge, just desire more. :) main page: SNIP I have had a lot of problems getting the menu bar to stay centered under the logo though but will work on that again at another time.

Another one I created: a tribute to one of our beloved pets: SNIP

The way I have been learning a lot since 1999 is from other websites. If I see something on the site that looks fantastic, such as scripts, I will bring that into dreamweaver and mess around with it one code at a time to see what each element does. I have a lot of fun doing that.

Edited by happygeek because: links snipped
Member Avatar for diafol

DELETED

What, you were serious after all?? Haw haw, even funnier. My ****s are indeed in danger of falling off!


//EDIT
Still giggling.

Edited by happygeek because: quoted reply to now deleted message snipped
Member Avatar for almostbob

Ignorance is bliss
many have tried to reduce your blissfulness
refusal to learn replaces ignorance with stupidity
andyou can't fix stupid Thankyou Jeff Foxworthy and Ron White

Edited by almostbob because: unbelievable, actually thinks that is good
Member Avatar for almostbob

Ignoring the op at least till the laughter stops

K
Dreamweaver isnt bad, the code it produces inearly versions, is bloated
have no experience with any dreamweaver version newer than4 years so that may be wrong
saw a lot of tags with inline styling in old output
if the version of dreamweaver that you have makes code that works
stay with it
its likely html4, 4 was the standard for a very lonng time incomputer years

For most things you may want to accomplish, download a freeware source script designed to do it, examine it to findhow they achieved their result, then recode it tighter
anything that doesnt work, there are gurus available for every situation, just ask and one of them will be able to show
Even Skank, provides a useful resource, such a perfect example of what not to do.

Member Avatar for SKANK!!!!!

the only thing im laffing about is that u think u have more than one ****!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Member Avatar for diafol

**** = site??

C'mon folks, roll up and offer your suggestions for Skank's witty statement.

Member Avatar for Assinaters99

oh well i dont use dtd ever and well, i thot that apple did something that had to do with html5?

Member Avatar for diafol

oh well i dont use dtd ever and well, i thot that apple did something that had to do with html5?

Like AlmostBob says, if you don't test your site in multiple environments, you probably won't be aware of how your site looks to others, especially if you trip quirks mode. Although browsershots.org is an useful resource, it's not very practical when it comes to real testing, especially if you're looking at 10+ pages.

HTML5 has been in the pipeline for a looooong time. Loads of people have been instrumental in its development, from all walks of the web/software industry etc. Apple is just one, albeit influential player.

Member Avatar for Kaycy

I believe I am using HTML 4.01?

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">

Member Avatar for almostbob

K,
stay with it till there is something in html 5/6 that you need

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.