[Framework-Team] Plone 5 - rough roadmap

[Laurence Rowe]

It is listed as an "obsolete permitted doctype string"
http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#obsolete-permitted-doctype-string
- i.e. we can lie about the doctype. I'm not sure why xhtml 1.0
transitional is not allowed.

Laurence

On 16 March 2010 22:18, Alexander Limi <limi at plone.org> wrote:
> The way it works is that you can use the XHTML "spelling" (ie. closing your
> tags), but you serve it up as normal HTML.
>
> http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#Should_I_close_empty_elements_with_.2F.3E_or_.3E.3F
>
> There's no Strict or similar thing in HTML5, AFAIK.
>
> (There is also something informally referred to as "XHTML5" which is serving
> it as XML, which isn't what we want to do)
>
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Laurence Rowe <l at lrowe.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> By my reading of the html 5 draft, it would seem conformant with the
>> (html5) spec to serve a document with a text/html Content-Type but an
>> XHTML Strict doctype.
>>
>> On 16 March 2010 20:14, Alexander Limi <limi at plone.org> wrote:
>> > What does transitional doctype have to do with geolocation?
>> >
>> > (and XHTML STRICT is a problem, since it implies serving with XML MIME
>> > type,
>> > which IE doesn't handle, so that's unlikely to happen)
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Veda Williams <veda at groundwire.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> This brings up the question of when we're moving away from Transitional
>> >> DOCTYPE. Do we have a sense of when this will happen? I'm particularly
>> >> keen
>> >> on knowing, as it opens up the door for us in terms of geolocation in
>> >> the
>> >> next year or so.
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> - Veda
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Mar 16, 2010, at 12:40 PM, Alexander Limi wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 4:45 AM, Wichert Akkerman <wichert at wiggy.net>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I'ld like to see a list of pros and cons of using HTML 5 as well. I am
>> >>> quite worried by the lack of proper support in existing browsers. None
>> >>> of
>> >>> them implement any of the existing HTML standards properly, and I fear
>> >>> that
>> >>> switching to the still unfinished HTML5 would be a several steps too
>> >>> far at
>> >>> this point in time.
>> >>
>> >> What parts in particular do you find are not working? Browsers that
>> >> don't
>> >> have dedicated support for HTML5 will just treat those tags similar to
>> >> div
>> >> elements (given an HTML5 shiv for styling to apply in IE), and most of
>> >> the
>> >> new form-related enhancements are additive in nature.
>> >>
>> >> In general, HTML5 renders even on IE6, there isn't much magic here (but
>> >> of
>> >> course it doesn't get any of the advantages either). HTML5 is mostly
>> >> about
>> >> standardizing edge case behaviors and adding new abilities that will
>> >> gracefully degrade in older browsers — and then a few new tags like
>> >> video/audio (that are also relatively easy to make degrade) and
>> >> structural
>> >> elements like article/footer, etc.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Alexander Limi · http://limi.net
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Framework-Team mailing list
>> >> Framework-Team at lists.plone.org
>> >> http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
>> >>
>> >> ________________________________
>> >> Veda Williams
>> >> Web Developer
>> >> Groundwire
>> >> 206.286.1235x23
>> >> veda at groundwire.org
>> >> ________________________________
>> >> ONE/Northwest is now Groundwire!  Read all about our new name.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Alexander Limi · http://limi.net
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Framework-Team mailing list
>> > Framework-Team at lists.plone.org
>> > http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
>> >
>> >
>
>
>
> --
> Alexander Limi · http://limi.net
>