HTML5 trailer - Find your Hero

[leo20789]

"invalid html" thats good enough for me

[Jamman88888]

someone help i have firefox 4 beta 9 and i joined the html5 test thing but even this vid still loads in flash all vids do my friend tryed on his computer we both have the same problem still loads in flash any help is appreciated

[zakawer]

@Jamman88888 I have no problem.

[moneymayhem2000]

this was shit

[harrydhcco]

fome la wea de video, ningun ejemplo como tal de como funciona la wea html 5

[Marzullo63]

which music is at 1:31?

[Plataformicos]

Boring

[BuschTukkerMan]

nice video

[uaboob]

html5 is not a standard yet. To say it is better is patently ridiculous. Developers use html5 and flash now. Flash isnt going anywhere. Browsers presently all support the same video format. The largest browser on the internet will use html5 but not without a plugin. So there is a lot to do before it becomes a standard. h.264 is proprietary so do we trust this power with one patent holder who can dictate royalties?

[pedrocuba]

already joined in youtube(dot)com/html5

but i cant see this video in HTML 5, an1 having the same prob?

[tuleo554]

@planetdarwin yeah HTML5 is just for web everyone knows that

as for your blending modes comment these are trivial graphical effects that can be achieved very easily and yes I'm sure ull be able to find a tool kit to do this sort of thing

and no html5 is not a video editing software, for that you need to include encoders/decoders, certainly when we get a decent free codec there will be more free editing software but this issue has nothing to do with html5

[planetdarwin]

@tuleo554

FYI I have changed my opinion on HTML5.

[tuleo554]

@planetdarwin I'm very glad to hear that!

[jucandyboy]

well, flash is better

[tuleo554]

5 misconceptions about HTML5

most of which were garnered from these very forums!

tulesblog(dot)(com)/5-misconce­ptions-about-html5

if you agree or disagree please let me know, leave a comment, no registration is needed

[platinumdynamite]

Flash is faster. For once.

[dr0psd]

Flash version is better

[KingofdaHipHop]

guys, it is only a beta, so chill out.

[irreverentmoose]

I heard that music in a PAC commercial for wildlife or something XD

[abhas1]

I hate to say it, but the Flash version was better.

[shneebleu]

@abhas1 What, when it was laggier?

[edycop]

But, it has 'table' tag, I don't like it.

[dented42]

cute, but I still with we had XHTML2 instead...

[louismarcil]

this is fucking sad

[ihavegreenapples]

This fail. Nice try though.

[warlord90210]

HTML 5 FTW

[ChilapaOfTheAmazons]

A number of useful HTML5 features are already implemented in browsers shipping *right now* and degrade gracefully in old browsers.

And much wider support will be already available in early 2009 with Firefox 3.1 and IE 8.

Check out the details at: wiki(dot)whatwg(dot)org and search the page "Implementations in Web browsers".

[novascotialife]

HTML 5 will deal with invalid code by making any old code valid. How does this solve anything?

[liorean]

HTML 5 will solve it not by making old invalid code valid (though some of that will happen, too) but by making the way user agents treat invalid code consistent.

Q: "How should this spiffy user agent we're making deal with the majority of the web - the pages that are invalid?"

Current A: "Do some like Internet Explorer does, do some like Netscape did, do some like Mozilla does, and do the rest as you see fit."

Post-HTML-5 A: "Do this way." --> UA parsing part of the spec

[liorean]

Much invalid code will remain invalid, but in difference to the current situation user agent makers will have a well detailed and reasonable specification for how they should treat that invalid code. They no longer have to decide for every feature: "Should I do this like Internet Explorer does it? Like Mozilla does it? Like Netscape did it? (Yes, this is still a factor - Internet Explorer is made on this premise) Should I just do what makes sense for me?"

[liorean]

HTML 5 is better for web developers than the current situation because it provides new features that they want to use and makes it easier to write code that works in every browser at once instead of having to meticulously write everything so that you avoid that nasty bug in this browser and this nasty bug in that browser etc.

[liorean]

HTML 5 is better for browser makers than the current situation because it makes clear rules for how to handle errors so that they don't have to reverse engineer the others.

[liorean]

HTML 5 is better for users of browsers than the current situation because it does it's best to make sure that no matter which browser is used, the code will be treated the same way, will display the same, will function the same way.

[liorean]

All in all, HTML 5 is better because it leaves fewer gray areas, particularly when it comes to error handling. This means less pain for users because developers didn't target their particular browser, platform etc; and less pain for developers caused by browsers having different ideas for error handling.

[SOJotacon]

@liorean All good points but for me the most important to me is the fact that HTML5 is way less taxing on the hardware. It uses so much less resources. Especially for Macs.

[serpentsong]

I have been under a rock for the past few years and disappointed to crawl out and find the world moving away from XHTML which seemed to me so much like a step in the right direction. oh well.

This is from the WHATWG FAQ page:

"It is estimated that HTML5 will reach a W3C recommendation in the year 2022 or later. This will be approximately 18-20 years of development, since beginning in mid-2004."

[reduxphl]

2010? optimistic...