
The Web Can Do That? (video) - DanielRibeiro
https://developers.google.com/events/io/sessions/gooio2012/204/
======
JD557
Excelent talk. I've been asking in various places how could I access the local
file system with a web app and the response was always "You can't due to
security reasons" (makes sense, I wouldn't want any website messing with my
files).

When I saw the drag and drop + filesystem API + download, I was amazed, that
is exactly what I've been looking for.

------
enobrev
Excellent talk. Here are the slides: <http://www.htmlfivecan.com/>

~~~
RenierZA
That site is extremely slow (with lots of CPU usage) on Firefox.

Seems fine on Chrome

------
seanlinehan
I literally cheered during the flexbox portion. It will be so great in 2 years
when it's safe to use ;)

~~~
javis
At least it is supported in IE 10, which ships with Windows 8 so it will get
quite a lot of marketshare. The main reason IE 8 kept so much marketshare
because it initially shipped with Windows 7.

If it wasn't in IE 10, we would be waiting a whole lot longer for it to be
safe to use.

------
Alex_Marshall
wow can most people understand everything he is talking about? I have a long
ways to go as a web designer/developer

~~~
nnq
not to worry... thanks to browser support delay you have something like 2-3
years at your disposal to get up to speed with all these :)

------
pav3l
Very cool, but unfortunately things "the web can do" are limited by things
"bad popular web-browsers can do"

------
mattmanser
Great presentation, very informative, but on a slight tangent I watch things
like this and often get frustrated with, probably unintentional, nonsense that
comes out of HTML advocates mouths.

'I have to touch js and it's super icky' - when talking about boxes resizing
themselves

It's only icky because we can't over-ride control behaviour at a fundamental
inheritance level.

Truth is it wouldn't actually be a problem if controls were actually
extensible and overridable. If we could actually inherit and program the
controls in browsers this all would have been solved 5 years ago, instead we
have to wait for the browsers to agree on the next badly written, half-assed
death-by-committee spec they'll bring out.

I mean look at what happens at 7:30:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=X...](http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=X_ek1wSe66o#t=444s)

Is that what I actually want happening? The content of B overflowing into C?
No. But that's HTML's ethos, content is king, which is fundamentally wrong for
apps where layout is king.

I have this constant nagging wish to 1. Use anything but JS in the browser and
2. To have actual control over the behaviour of controls and to be able to
build composite controls.

Deep down I know it's never going to happen, but why do they have to pretend
that it's brilliant when in fact it's just actually kinda sad that HTML is
still stuck in the 90s. Why do they want us to coo over features that have
been available in other layout engines for decades now?

It's like the speakers often wear a special kind of blinkers in presentations
like this, like they've never used an application outside the browser and seen
what computers and programmers can actually do when not hamstrung by HTML.

------
camus
It's more like "chrome can do what ?". unless you believe chrome is the web...

