HTML editor dumps 'HTML5' for HTML

Summary: HTML 5 now HTML says WHATWG just two days after the World Wide Web Consortium debuted a flashy new HTML 5 badge.

The editor of the Hypertext Markup Language standard has dumped the term 'HTML 5', just two days after the World Wide Web Consortium debuted a flashy new HTML 5 badge. HTML 5 now HTML says WHATWG

"HTML is the new HTML 5," Ian Hickson, of the Web Hypertext Application Working Group (WHATWG), said in a blog post on Wednesday. The announcement embodies a more continuous development process that Hickson has been planning for more than a year. However, Hickson told CNET News that the World Wide Web Consortium's (W3C) HTML 5 logo hastened a change that had been planned for later in 2011.

"Now even the W3C is saying 'HTML 5' means everything from CSS to font formats, so advocates really were left without anything to specifically refer to HTML. So we asked around, and the objections to the rename were much reduced already, even compared to a week ago, so we went for it," Hickson said. The demise of the HTML 5 label will only affect one of the two groups that oversees HTML's development, however, as the W3C remains attached to the term.

For more on this story, see HTML editor dumps 'HTML5' even as W3C touts it on CNET News.

Topic: Software Development

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

20 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • HTML 5

    HTML 5 is the future, goodbye FLASH!
    Hasam1991
    • RE: HTML editor dumps 'HTML5' for HTML

      @Hasam1991
      That will not happen for a very long time.
      Look at how many large companies are still using cobal. And it has not updated majorly since 1965
      rparker009
      • After the 1960s, COBOL had two major updates: 1974 & 1985

        and it has been updated in some compilers for OOP. So, you sound a bit outdated and misinformed.

        However, since HTML is the topic of the discussion, my take on it is that, HTML doesn't need a name change and HTML is fine.

        And, since it's being referred to as including CSS and even a bit of scripting, perhaps the name should be change altogether to iAPI, or "Internet Application Programming Interface".
        adornoe
      • RE: HTML editor dumps 'HTML5' for HTML

        @rparker009 can you spell COBOL?
        dixonrf
      • RE: HTML editor dumps 'HTML5' for HTML

        @rparker009

        Yeah. That and the fact that there is a COBOL.NET to write such apps for the .NET framework. Darn thing just won't die. :)
        mibjr
      • RE: HTML editor dumps 'HTML5' for HTML

        adornoe@... iAPI? Really?

        The idiots in charge of the standards need to stop confusing established names. HTML is HTML, CSS is CSS, etc. No need to make a mess of everything by now declaring that HTML is HTML, CSS, and scripting. Heck, why stop there? Let's lump all backend code, images, and databases into the term as well.
        winpho
      • winpho: What's wrong with setting a standard for the whole internet

        with one set of coding for page presentation?

        With HTML alone (or HTML5, if you wish), there will still be a need for dressing up the presentation with CSS (CSS3 soon to be the standard), and with dynamic pages, there will have to be scripting of some sort, whether JScript or VBScript.net or PHP or anything else. But, certain functions for scripting will have to be standardized, and that might mean one scripting language for those specific functions.

        So, if we're headed towards HTML5 with CSS3 and a certain amount standard functions that need scripting, why not come up with ONE standard that all webpage presentations need to follow? Don't we already have a lot of fragmentation with so many different standards?

        The name for the standard is the least of the problems. So, don't get all worked up about the little things.
        adornoe
  • True...

    True just remember how long it took Dell to get rid of floppy disk, 2003?! Apple got rid of it in 1998! so no Flash on iOS means HTML 5 will take over, sure some people will hang on to Flash... people who use Dells... oh wait Dull's lol
    Hasam1991
    • RE: HTML editor dumps 'HTML5' for HTML

      @Hasam1991 Dell far outsold Apple in those days. Maybe Dell was shipping what their customers wanted. Jobs has done fantastic by providing something ahead of people's defined needs, but the Jobs-less Apple was not much to brag about.
      Regulator1956
      • RE: HTML editor dumps 'HTML5' for HTML

        @Regulator1956
        And today Apple could just buy Dell, shut it down and return the money to shareholders..
        Hasam1991
    • RE: HTML editor dumps 'HTML5' for HTML

      @Hasam1991
      You do realize that end users aren't the ones who make such decisions, don't you? And that iOS isn't the only big force in the world of IT? That kind of thinking is rather myopic.
      notinkeys
      • RE: HTML editor dumps 'HTML5' for HTML

        @notinkeys

        Your very statement the iOS isn't the only big force in the world of IT speaks volumes.

        iOS is an OS for personal devices. To even think of it as a big thing in the world of IT just illustrates that it's influence is massively above what anyone would expect from something designed to make your MP3 player and your phone work!!!

        Hasam1991 may just be right - iOS may eventually have enough influence to cause flash to not be worth using. I don't think it has got to that stage yet, but it might soon.

        I don't think MS is particularly fond of Flash either, why do you think they introduced silverlight?
        richardw66
    • RE: HTML editor dumps 'HTML5' for HTML

      @Hasam1991 ... RIIIIIIIIGHT! And how did removing floppies from their computers help Apple's enterprise penetration?

      Precisely.

      Companies like Dell tend to sell products that their users ask for rather than trying to blaze trails for the hell of it.
      bitcrazed
      • RE: HTML editor dumps 'HTML5' for HTML

        @bitcrazed

        I don't think they removed floppy drives from Macs for enterprise users - but then I don't think floppy drives had much effect on enterprise users either.

        1. Enterprise users are not the world - sorry IT departments, but many humans use computers, and wish to do so without your control.

        2. Lack of floppy drives increases security in enterprise situations, most decent IT departments would not be asking users to exchange files on floppy disks in enterprise environments. And most would prefer that users did not place disks in their PCs.

        3. Floppy drives were still available for those who needed them.

        What do you mean for the hell of it? I have a PC with a floppy drive - never used the floppy drive - it is just a waste of money and electricity. Why does every PC need something that does not get used, and what's more does not have the capacity to store anything worth storing?

        This trail-blazing is the same trail blazing as the release of the iPad, widely criticised for being useless and look what happens? How many other companies are now replicating this useless trail-blazing?

        Also - give me a list of which Dell models include a Floppy Drive? If Apple was wrong, and Dell and it's customers were right, where do I buy one of these?
        richardw66
    • RE: HTML editor dumps 'HTML5' for HTML

      @Hasam1991

      Yeah, and it will be ratified and completed when? In 2019? Flash till then...
      cybr2th@...
  • There is no standard for regular HTML yet.

    We still develop 2 different JavaScript applications for every web site, and two sets of CSSs. It would never be a standard. You have at least 4 major players on browsers market now: Microsoft IE, Google Chrome, Firefox, Apple Safary and I think it is just beggining. Taking into account that we already have a millions of mobile devices, which are not supposed to be ever updated, it is highly unlikly that HTML5 would every be cross platform, or at least cross browser standard.
    Did you ever try to browse internet from mobile device? It is misery experience. Everybody develop specialised clients in device related framework.
    So it would be the same, Microsoft solutions would dominate PC market. Android and IPhone applications would stay at mobile. Forget about HTML5. It is more real that RSS would be a primary standard on the web, pritty soon, since it allow client make its own decitions about layout.
    Ha-Ha ...
    Nikolayev
    • RE: HTML editor dumps 'HTML5' for HTML

      @Nikolayev "we already have a millions of mobile devices, which are not supposed to be ever updated," - under most current wireless plans, these phones get replaced every 2 years. Of course they'll be "updated".
      ejhonda
    • RE: HTML editor dumps 'HTML5' for HTML

      @Nikolayev

      Browsing internet from my iPad and iPhone is not a misery at all, it works well and my friends are all slowly moving their habits to using their iPhone as their primary internet access device.

      Yes, maybe HTML 5 will end up with the same mess as we have now - but it will be a little better, and the UI will be better for the user.

      Mobile devices are meant to be updated, some may not be updated without being replaced, but in this country it is normal for users to upgrade every 2 years and the carriers encourage this because it means re-signing contracts.

      Most mobile browsers are Webkit based and so there is a lot of standardisation around HTML 5 on mobiles.

      Iphone apps can be very easily ported to Mac desktops, iOS and OS X are very much the same, usually porting will require rethinking for the window and Menu interface, and mouse rather than touch, but most of the frameworks will be there.

      Do you really think that without HTML 5 the web development world is a simple place?
      richardw66
  • I just wish people would stop confusing...

    HTML with Javascript, Php/Mysql and CSS3, People seem to encompass that html5 alone will kill flash, when really html5 by itself looks useless without scripting and css3. Oh and Flash wont die, it still does it's job rather well, just look at all the arguments over which codec will be used for html5 and you can see why flash got popular for video. Because it allowed any browser to see the same content, instead of right now where we have the 2 different camps for h.264 and Ogg/WebM.

    Wow, i went off topic, stupid ranting.

    Back on topic, IMO it's easier to develop to a snapshot standard rather than a so called living document. That way i can be sure what all browsers support, rather than the current nightmare of going through every single browser to see if my code works.
    Gavello
  • ASP vs. ASP.NET

    I was brought up in the late 90's and early 2000's as an ASP guy. I had my options to use ColdFusion, PHP, etc...but it just happened that way for me. As a child, I programmed in DOS and BASIC, BASIC-A, or QWBASIC.<br><br>Today, I still use what they now call "Classic ASP". It is non-compiled, making it far easier for me, and more importantly, the programmers that follow me to support the apps/sites to update. The code is simple, without all the added b.s. from .NET and still accomplishes the same thing in very similar timeframes (at run-time for the end-user).<br><br>They can keep changing the name, and even the programming base even significantly, but browser developers (IE, Firefox, Chrome, Safari) will still need to support "classic HTML" because of the diversity of options available (and that have <i>been</i> available) to web programmers like myself; there's just far too many apps/sites out there to suddenly tell the web development world, "You must update 100% of your work to the new standard"...it's just not gonna happen, and doesn't need to.<br><br>I agree with a compilation of above statements that there are different environments for different end-user experiences...Flash for video, games, etc...ASP/PHP/CFM for back-end programming, and Javascript for data integrity and other such client-based run-time functionality.<br><br>Change the name, boys, even the standard, but I don't see any compelling reason to change any of my code unless the market of a particular app/site compels me to...in the end, it's simply supply and demand.
    theitguyfromny