Coffeehouse Thread

11 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

IE9 and HTML5

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    CKurt

    I have been looking in to HTML 5 a bit to get myself more educated about it now that even IE9 will implement the standard.

    However, running the IE9 B├Ęta and visiting some site's claming to be HTML5 examples, they just all don't work. And I did check if they are not use -webkit or -moz tags. But somehow they just don't work.

    Here are a few examples:

    http://w3schools.com/html5/html5_form_input_types.asp  (and most other demo's on that section like http://w3schools.com/html5/tryit.asp?filename=tryhtml5_form_form )

    http://playground.html5rocks.com/#columns and many others on that demo page (okay it's made by google but still, even if you change the code not to include -moz or -webkit, it does not work most of the time)

    The only stuff that really works is what they showed of <video> <audio> <canvas> and @FontFace.

     

    What is the deal?

  • User profile image
    magicalclick

    It is possible the site hasn't switch IE9, and when they see IE, they locked to IE8. And HTML5 is vague actually, so, it is natrual to see differecet, check the IE blog. Even the so called stanadard HTML4 Chorme and FF don't look the same. Like when you set a simple size on scrollable div, Chrome and IE are same, but, FF is larger.

    The "oh we followed standard" is just a poor excuse IMO.

    Leaving WM on 5/2018 if no apps, no dedicated billboards where I drive, no Store name.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    wkempf

    I don't believe they ever claimed to fully support HTML5 (which would be a mistake to do, since HTML5 isn't a standard yet). In point of fact, IE9 doesn't support the HTML5 form changes.

    The columns thing isn't supported either, but just to pick nits, that's not an HTML5 thing anyway. That's a CSS3 thing, and from what I could gather recently while researching CSS3 layouts, I wouldn't touch it if I were the IE9 team either. They really don't seem to have figured out what they should standardize on in CSS3 for fixing the obvious issues with CSS layouts. There's 3 or 4 different "solutions", all with various issues and short comings, and none seem to be likely to actually be in the final standard. I'm sure an actual web dev will correct me if I'm wrong here, but that's what I gathered in a couple of hours researching this.

  • User profile image
    CKurt

    It's just disappointing. HTML5 en CSS3 go togetter quite well, but It's almost unreal how many years it takes the W3C to come up with these standards. You can never please everybody! Deal with it and make a decission and ship!

    It's a shame.

  • User profile image
    Bass

    @CKurt: Some of the demos on Chrome Expirements work pretty well in IE9. Which is a major advancement considering virtually none of them work in IE8.

  • User profile image
    figuerres

    HTML:

    The Not a Standard Standard that's broke by design so that no one can design a standard design.

    and with each new version they add more non standard things that can be implimented differently by each browser maker and yet still be part of the "standard"

    a perfect example of "Design by Committee"

    Perplexed

  • User profile image
    Maddus Mattus

    Here's an idea;

    Why doesnt Microsoft port WPF to javascript using the canvas object.

    I tried to build some basic graphics, but is was very code intensive. So I figure that if Microsoft ported WPF to javascript and use somesort of JSON content file (instead of XAML) it would rock!

    Or would that hurt Silverlight too much?

  • User profile image
    magicalclick

    , Maddus Mattus wrote

    Here's an idea;

    Why doesnt Microsoft port WPF to javascript using the canvas object.

    I tried to build some basic graphics, but is was very code intensive. So I figure that if Microsoft ported WPF to javascript and use somesort of JSON content file (instead of XAML) it would rock!

    Or would that hurt Silverlight too much?

    How would that rock if it is not XAML? I would rather stick with silverlight in regards to WPF.

    Leaving WM on 5/2018 if no apps, no dedicated billboards where I drive, no Store name.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    Maddus Mattus

    It would rock because you will no longer need a plugin todo the cool stuff that WPF offers!

    And you can do it in php, java, etc!

    And someone will eventually do it (maybe the jQuery guys) and it's good to be infront of the bandwagon some times.

  • User profile image
    magicalclick

    If that ever happens (someone made it), great, because everyone can use it and MS spend 0 bucks.

     

    But just purely disccusing jQuery UI, they are not that great. My co-workers totally don't liked their tabs, dialogs, and so on. I ended up only using resizing and dragable. Which both have no visual to it. As for tabs, I ended up making my own, which is quite easy.

    Leaving WM on 5/2018 if no apps, no dedicated billboards where I drive, no Store name.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    Maddus Mattus

    @magicalclick:The thing is, even with asp.net mvc 2 microsoft distributes two javascript frameworks. The mvc one and jquery. It's like porgramming with a schizo. Sometimes you chose A, then you chose method B.

    All out of the box functionality with MVC uses the Microsoft framework (wich is ok). But when you want to do your own validation, you are stuck with jQuery. When you create an actionlink, it generates an request with the Microsoft framework. But when you want your own, you are stuck with jQuery.

    In my last project we decided to ditch the Microsoft part and go 100% for jQuery. That was a pain because we couldnt use the full power of MVC, but we could be more flexible on the UI part.

    My point is, that if they are behind the bandwagon again, it will take more development effort from the developers combining all the frameworks into something neat and tidy.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.