

Technologies often called part of HTML5 that aren't - asto
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/HTML/HTML5#Technologies_often_called_part_of_HTML5_that_aren%27t

======
scdc
So what if HTML5 doesn't technically include CSS3 and JavaScript. It's helpful
to have a simple term for "the collection of web technologies that allow rich
UI applications in browsers released ~2010." HTML5 fits the bill. Look at what
the term "AJAX" did for AJAX, even if you weren't using XML.

~~~
untog
I actually thought they'd changed the "marketing" definition so that it does
include things like CSS3:

<http://www.w3.org/html/logo/>

Check out badge 8 - it's CSS3 specifically. Who knows what the icon is, but
still.

~~~
jamesgeck0
It's a stylized '3'. It's the only HTML5 badge I can identify on sight.

------
melling
The rest of the world likes to keep things simple so we have this term HTML5
which means next generation web technology to most people, which is all they
really have time for. They're running the world after all.

Geeks being who they are like to be pendantic and discuss the details ad
nauseam. Gotta quit running into the weeds on the little things.

The terminology we're going to use is HTML5, and we understand it's a catch-
all term. End of story. Next problem.

~~~
ryanto
No, not at all. There is a spec for HTML5 and it is most certainly not 'next
generation web technology'. It goes into great detail on a couple of specific
features that browsers will aim to support.

The problem is that people often want the latest and greatest technology.
Geolocation is a good example of this. They think because chrome is an html5
browser they can have geolocation and often are confused when you try to
explain why that feature won't always work. "But it's part of html5!" they
say.

Instead of bundling everything under "HTML5" I wish we could just talk about
the actual features.

~~~
sukuriant
Because the lay-person that doesn't give two flips about how your website
works, just wants to know if it's modern/exciting... cares?

------
mikeryan
We do a lot of rich internet apps which are heavy HTML/JS and get asked a lot
"Are you using HTML5" and I'd go down this whole spiel about "well really we
like the CSS3 features" and "a lot of what we do isn't HTML5 its just HTML4
and Javascript" or "Maybe we try to use local storage but have to fall back to
standard cookies, and backend persistence for legacy browsers".

Eventually gave up and now when people ask if an app is "HTML5" I just say
"yes".

~~~
statictype
My self-imposed rule is if the page's doctype is <!DOCTYPE html> then I say
it's HTML5 (regardless of what other technologies I actually use - it could
just be a static page for all I care).

~~~
MostAwesomeDude
This is really the heart of HTML5 and the only important part of the whole
deal.

------
catshirt
how are we still talking about this? for over a year i was a proponent for
"let's call things what they are". html5 should be html5. css3 and javascript
should be css3 and javascript. this is why things have names after all.

that said, i realized my efforts were futile when w3 themselves said that
html5 should be a term used to encompass all these technologies. not that i
disagree with mozilla on principle of course, but unless w3 has changed their
mind again i think moz is incorrect here.

i can't find the source, but i trust i'm not recalling the article incorrectly
as i was quite bothered by it (and hn's complacent response).

~~~
talmand
Nope, disagree, you are wrong and Mozilla is right.

According to Wikipedia the W3C admitted their mistake:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML5#The_HTML5_logo>

Plus, check the HTML5 FAQ: <http://www.w3.org/html/logo/faq.html>

------
samarudge
HTML5 seems to have become the term used for referring to the newer features
in browsers. Is there a term that should be used to encompass HTML5, CSS3,
Javascript (Websockets, history API etc.)?

Still I guess HTML5 is better than "Web 3.0" =/

~~~
icebraining
The "WHATWG spec"? It's not pretty, but at least it's reasonably accurate.

~~~
Achshar
how about 'post-IE (6) internet'

------
johnnytee
On this website <http://www.w3.org/html/logo/> under technology and badge
builder they seem to imply that some of these are part of it.

~~~
talmand
I remember the debate in the community that happened when they announced those
logos. I'm on the side that it was a mistake to do so.

~~~
johnnytee
yes, it's abit ambiguous

------
Too
They forgot SVG

~~~
csomar
The list is not meant to be extensive. But do you have any data that shows
that SVG is confused with HTML5?

~~~
DanBC
(<http://www.w3.org/html/logo/>)

under 3d and effects:

> _Between SVG, Canvas, WebGL, and CSS3 3D features, you're sure to amaze your
> users with stunning visuals natively rendered in the browser._

------
aufreak3
well, if people are naturally lumping those items into a category, then it can
be counterproductive to deny that category. I'm going to attend the google
devfest talk titled "bleeding edge html5" today and the talk features the "web
audio api".

~~~
talmand
In that case the title is wrong, but I hope it's informative all the same.

------
d0vs
So is it any JS API that isn't manipulating an HTML(5) element?

------
cnxsoft
If WebSockets are not part of HTML5 why are they under HTML5 at W3C
<http://dev.w3.org/html5/websockets/>.

I've also attended Google DevFest recently, and they mentioned WebSockets as
part of HTML5.

~~~
MostAwesomeDude
WebSockets are part of HyBi, an HTTP task force's efforts. They don't depend
on HTML at all. They are also silly.

