

The Edge of HTML5 - tilt
http://html5-demos.appspot.com/static/html5-therealbleedingedge/template/index.html#1

======
ricardobeat
I realize this presentation was made for personal use on a specific browser,
but it makes me sad anyway.

I was reading HN on an iPad and couldn't even read the slides. This shit
happens all the time, and it's very annoying when you don't have a laptop in
reach. There's an amazingly capable browser on every modern phone/tablet and
yet they're left out of some content for no reason (and they even use webkit
too).

Requiring IE10 to showcase IE10's new abilities makes sense, but this isn't a
demo. Is it the edge of HTML5 or the edge of Chrome?

~~~
tomjen3
That presentation wouldn't even have worked in the latest edition of Firefox.

But it is important to understand that you need an uptodate browser to view
webpages today. Gracefully handling obsolete browsers is what got us into this
mess in the first place (actually it was allowing anything less than
completely correct pages -- you can't have syntax errors in your c code and
expect it to compile, why should your HTML be any different).

~~~
sopooneo
Would the web have thrived if browsers only accepted perfect html?

~~~
tomjen3
I can't see why it wouldn't. A clear and simple error message would allow
people to fix it.

------
tintin
As a webdeveloper I hope this won't be the future:

    
    
      <meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="chrome=1">
    

This might be the edge of HTML5, but is regression of the internet. Remember
the "This site should be viewed in IE5 or higher"? I hated it back then, I
hate it now.

~~~
ootachi
That's a Chrome Frame opt-in. Its only effect is to instruct an installation
of IE with Chrome Frame installed to switch over to Chrome Frame for these
sites.

That said, I do think Chrome Frame is a bad idea because it hijacks one
browser and turns it into a weird hybrid instead of just encouraging the use
of Chrome in the first place.

~~~
cleverjake
its only used in cases where the installation of chrome is not available, or
features based on proprietary VBScript attributes that are only available in
IE are needed on other sites.

------
imcqueen
I find Eric Bidelman's HTML5 decks very useful. I understand the complaints. I
occasionally read HN on my iPad and some links aren't tablet friendly.

These presentations are meant for developers and it's safe to assume that
anyone experimenting with HTML5 will have access to Chrome, even if it's not
their go-to browser.

------
habudibab
Honeeey, I just bought you this new computer with an Intel Core i7 Extreme
Edition processor so you can watch those HTML5 demos with more than 5 pictures
per second.

------
alpb
Quite poor usability on touch screens like iPad.

~~~
w0utert
Quite poor usability on desktop as well, not really the best advertising how
to use HTML5...

------
Sivart13
Opening this presentation pegs my Firefox 9 at 100% CPU. What the hell?

------
jacobolus
-webkit-cross-fade seems pretty unnecessary. Just putting the second image over the top of the first with variable opacity accomplishes precisely the same thing.

~~~
elisee
I wouldn't be so fast in dismissing it, I just checked and it actually does
more than simply putting an image over another: The cross-fade function
correctly handles opacity and different image sizes. Plus it allows for easy
use with CSS transitions.

"the start image has a global alpha applied to it equal to (1-p), the end
image has a global alpha applied to it equal to p, and the end image is then
composited over the start image with the source-over operation." (see
[http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-css3-images-20110217/#cross-
fad...](http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-css3-images-20110217/#cross-fade-
function))

There are many people working on the Web specs from various groups, and they
are very critical. Anything that's added to a draft will undergo a lot of
review so you'd be hard pressed to find something glaringly useless.

~~~
jacobolus
As specced, that’s actually incorrect then. The porter duff “over” operation
is identical to what’s used in browsers for regular painting of
semitransparent layers (or as another example, Photoshop’s “normal blend
mode”). If the below pixel A is entirely opaque, and the above pixel B has
opacity P, then the color of each pixel can be computed as (1 - P) * A + P *
B. If however you apply a global alpha to the below image beforehand, you get
something that isn’t a cross-fade at all, and in fact isn’t even fully opaque.

[edit: When I think about this a bit more, there is one time when cross-fade
is useful: For cross-fading between two semitransparent images. In that case
though, what’s wanted is not really a compositing operation at all, but rather
a straight linear interpolation between the respective RGBA components of the
two images.]

I don ’t at all believe that people working on the color and graphics aspects
of web specs are sufficiently critical. In general, those aspects have been
quite under-specced, and browser implementations have been incomplete and
buggy. Things are improving little by little, but to take one example, there
is still no proper color management of CSS/HTML colors in any browser except
Firefox, and I believe it’s still turned off by default there.

------
darksaga
I'm still wondering when did Firefox completely fall off? It seems like the
best demos for HTML5 capabilities are all done on Chrome.

------
tambourine_man
Black screen on iPhone 3G.

Not a very bright future.

~~~
tomjen3
What version of IOS are you running?

~~~
tambourine_man
4.2.1 which is as far this phone will go.

