locked
Expression Web 4 and HTML5? RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hi, I just got Expression Web 4 and I'm writing a site in HTML5.  I'm using the HTML5 doctype and Expression Web's "Doctype & Schema" is also set to HTML5.

     

    However, all of the HTML5 elements are throwing up errors in Expression Web 4.  Errors like:

     

    "In HTML5 the tag <section> is not permitted"

     

    Does anyone know what's wrong here and how I can get EW4 to recognize HTML5 elements?   

    Thursday, August 5, 2010 11:29 AM

Answers

  • Hey aled.co,

    Your expectations are valid: if the program provides a doctype in the Document Type Declaration dropdown menu in the Page Editor Options, the program should validate the markup as the program claims to in the text for that menu option. Apparently one of our developers looked into providing HTML 5 support, but the full work did not make it into our final release.

    Some hopeful news - one of our testers, Greg Smith, is trying to find a solution. In fact, just now he found that he was able to add HTML 5 validation support simply by adding a few files to the program and restarting it. Fingers crossed ... he's going to do some more testing and talk with some folks about the logistics et al of distributing these files.

    Anna


    http://blogs.msdn.com/anna
    • Marked as answer by aled.co Thursday, August 5, 2010 7:13 PM
    Thursday, August 5, 2010 5:46 PM
    Moderator
  • IE 9 will be compliant with quite a bit of html 5 and EW Intellisense support of html has been concurrent with IE - as far as I know - so I would guess that upon the release of IE 9 that EW will follow along.
    That is exactly right.  What we did in Expression Web 4 was to look at what the IE team was doing with IE 9 to see if we could support whatever it was doing with respect to HTML 5.  We made the necessary code changes and created a schema file that provided a basic subset of the new standard that the IE team was using.  Unfortunately, something must have gotten messed up along the way, as it looks like the schema file we shipped with is broken.  Our test team is looking at an updated version of that file and we hope to make that available via a download when it's been tested to our satisfaction.
    Paul Bartholomew, Microsoft Expression Web
    Sunday, August 8, 2010 3:24 PM
    Moderator

All replies

  • Well, seeing as how HTML5 is 12 years away from adoption--2022 is the goal, and since browser support is spotty at best, and since what browser support there is is for specifications that may change at any time, I don't think Intellisense will be helping you.

    I think you just have to accept that you are way ahead of the curve and you're on your own in many areas.


    Some see the glass as half full. Others see the glass as half empty. I see a glass that's clearly twice as large as it needs to be.
    Thursday, August 5, 2010 12:14 PM
  • Hi, thanks for the reply, but if that is the case, why does Expression Web 4 offer HTML5 as a Doctype it will accept and validate?

    Thursday, August 5, 2010 12:16 PM
  • Hi, thanks for the reply, but if that is the case, why does Expression Web 4 offer HTML5 as a Doctype it will accept and validate?


    It doesn't not on my copy and I haven't made any changes to the doctypes included. If you have an HTML 5 doctype available in your code snippets you or someone else with access to your computer has added the doctype to the list. Default install of EW 4 uses XHTML Transitional as the default doctype. It offers the following as alternatives to the default:

    1. HTML 4.01 Frameset
    2. HTML 4.01 Strict
    3. XHTML 1.1 (don't use very poorly supported in browsers and was released something like 8 years ago but never gained traction.)
    4. XHTML 1.0 Frameset
    5. XHTML 1.0 Strict

    I am not and will not use HTML 5 on a production site since there isn't a single browser out there that fully supports it and the way HTML 5 is supported varies greatly from 0 support to different implementations of the same element. There isn't even a codec agreed upon to support for video. Apple of course says that HTML 5 is the way to go but then they own the codec they are pushing for HTML 5 video, not open source but "freely licensed" until I think it is 2016 while the specification hasn't even reached release candidate status which means that not one single element is finalized!!!

    Google and several other companies are pushing for a different HTML 5 video codec, one that is open source and withtout licensing fees, ever. Until these sorts of things are settled and more than 50% of the browser IN USE can actually support HTML 5 wihtout loadingmassive javascript files to tell the browser what to do with elements its never heard of or how to render existing elements differently to comply with the new, not yet final specification, why would you want to use HTML 5?  Unless you are exclusively targetting iPad/iPhone/iPod users with video and do not give a flying fart about anyone else there is absolutely no reason to use HTML 5 beyond an experimental site right now.


    MS MVP Expression Tutorials & Help http://by-expression.com
    • Marked as answer by aled.co Thursday, August 5, 2010 4:56 PM
    • Unmarked as answer by aled.co Thursday, August 5, 2010 4:58 PM
    Thursday, August 5, 2010 3:26 PM
  • Interesting, my V4 has HTML 5 in both the doctype and secondary schema lists. I've not added snippet definitions or anything else to get this. ??
    Ian Haynes

    EW V4 Add-Ins
    EW resources, hints and tips
    Thursday, August 5, 2010 3:39 PM
  • My copy of EW4 does offer a HTML 5 doctype declaration.    I suspect that's the only "support" you really have for HTML 5 in EW yet: it would be hard for the program to guess what the final definition, years away, will be.
    Thursday, August 5, 2010 3:46 PM
  • Same here.  HTML 5 is in my list, no changes to the list made by me.
    --
    Chris Hanscom - Microsoft MVP
    On Facebook | On Twitter | Resource Center | Veign's Blog | Web Development Help

    Get a Complete Website Analysis by Veign
    Thursday, August 5, 2010 3:46 PM
  • Ah, we are looking at different locations. I do see HTML 5 under Page Editor Options > Authoring and personally I believe it should not be there.

    There is no such specification at this time and I do not bleive that any specificiation that hasn't at least reached the RC status should be in that list since there can be no schema to match it. Someone could write an add-in I suppose since that could be updated w/o updating the whole program but I still think it is a mistake.


    MS MVP Expression Tutorials & Help http://by-expression.com
    Thursday, August 5, 2010 3:51 PM
  • Agreed - Having it there will just create problems and confusion.
    --
    Chris Hanscom - Microsoft MVP
    On Facebook | On Twitter | Resource Center | Veign's Blog | Web Development Help

    Get a Complete Website Analysis by Veign
    Thursday, August 5, 2010 4:05 PM
  • Ian, Kathy & Veign, thanks for your info - I'm happy to see that my copy of EW isn't an anomaly!  Could you please tell me - when you select HTML5 as the doctype, does EW mark HTML5 elements like <section> as errors?

     

    And can I just say at this point that I am not developing a commercial site in HTML5 - I am playing around with it for a personal, leisure project so can people please stop getting irate and listing reasons I shouldn't be using HTML5 when they have nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

    Thursday, August 5, 2010 5:03 PM
  • Are you by chance applying the HTML5 doctype to an older page?

     


    Expression Web MVP
    Thursday, August 5, 2010 5:19 PM
  • I noticed this too. I've also puttered with HTML5 on my own, just to see how it works. I especially like <!DOCTYPE html>, which is way cleaner than the XHTML doctype declaration. However, even though EW correctly inserts that, and flags self-closing tags as errors, it chokes on any of the perfectly valid section tags (header, footer, article, aside, etc.). It's kind of like using CSS3 - if you know you are doing what you want, just ignore EW's objections.

    Jim

    Thursday, August 5, 2010 5:21 PM
  • Hi Steve, no - I created the document from scratch in EW4, using the HTML5 doctype from the beginning.

     

    Thanks Jim, I guess this is a weird feature present in all copies of EW4.  Makes you wonder why they'd include the option if the software doesn't support it.  Aside from this little hiccup, I'm really liking EW4 so far.  

    Thursday, August 5, 2010 5:33 PM
  • Hey aled.co,

    Your expectations are valid: if the program provides a doctype in the Document Type Declaration dropdown menu in the Page Editor Options, the program should validate the markup as the program claims to in the text for that menu option. Apparently one of our developers looked into providing HTML 5 support, but the full work did not make it into our final release.

    Some hopeful news - one of our testers, Greg Smith, is trying to find a solution. In fact, just now he found that he was able to add HTML 5 validation support simply by adding a few files to the program and restarting it. Fingers crossed ... he's going to do some more testing and talk with some folks about the logistics et al of distributing these files.

    Anna


    http://blogs.msdn.com/anna
    • Marked as answer by aled.co Thursday, August 5, 2010 7:13 PM
    Thursday, August 5, 2010 5:46 PM
    Moderator
  • Hi Anna,  thanks for your response.  That sounds great, I'd love to see those files get released.  Though I'm disappointed that the HTML5 functionality doesn't work, I am glad and relieved that it's not just my copy of EW4 that's to blame. 

     

    In the meantime, I will continue to enjoy using EW for some of my non-HTML5 needs.   :)

     

    Aled

    • Edited by aled.co Friday, August 6, 2010 2:12 PM
    Thursday, August 5, 2010 7:08 PM
  • You can still use EW for HTML 5 but you'll have to be your own error checker. <g>
    MS MVP Expression Tutorials & Help http://by-expression.com
    Thursday, August 5, 2010 8:00 PM
  • Well, seeing as how HTML5 is 12 years away from adoption--2022 is the goal, and since browser support is spotty at best, and since what browser support there is is for specifications that may change at any time, I don't think Intellisense will be helping you.

    The basis/definition for adoption taken by the W3 committee is "when two browsers implement the standard 100% and produce the same results". They are expecting that to happen by 2022 as you stated Bill. This "level of adoption" has never been achieved for any html standard, 1 2 3 or 4. Nevertheless, Intellisense supports some version of html.

    IE 9 will be compliant with quite a bit of html 5 and EW Intellisense support of html has been concurrent with IE - as far as I know - so I would guess that upon the release of IE 9 that EW will follow along.

    Thursday, August 5, 2010 10:12 PM
  • The problem is, TB, HTML5 is a developing standard. EW's Intellisense (and any browser support) are only compliant (in limited measure with whatever state HTML5 is currently in. So even if Intellisense supports HTML5, things could change at any time and the tag that passed today might fail in the real world 6 months from now.

    For anyone trying to produce quality websites for customers, writing to HTML5 is a fool's errand.


    Some see the glass as half full. Others see the glass as half empty. I see a glass that's clearly twice as large as it needs to be.
    Thursday, August 5, 2010 10:26 PM
  • That may be true Bill but again it's just not relevant to this thread.  

    The issue here is that Expression Web 4 allows you to set HTML5 as your doctype and leads you to believe that it will validate your HTML5 document, when it can't.

    Instead it tells you that your HTML5 elements are invalid when they are not. This leads to confusion and a lack of trust in Expression Web as a HTML editor. (Or worse - it makes you doubt what you know to be true.)  

    Or as in my case - it leads you to believe you are experiencing an error with the program itself.

    Thursday, August 5, 2010 11:19 PM
  • Actually it isn't possible to validate HTML 5 because there isn't a final specification. Eventually EW will accept the parts of the HTML 5 spec that IE supports but as Anna said there isn't much in it now.
    MS MVP Expression Tutorials & Help http://by-expression.com
    Friday, August 6, 2010 12:07 AM
  • Hi Cheryl, that's not strictly true.  Even though there is no final specification, it is certainly possible to validate HTML5 against the working draft. 
    Friday, August 6, 2010 1:19 AM
  • Which working draft? It changes frequently with the last changes just published yesterday. That's what I mean about a moving target. I'm on the W3C mail list that deals with accessibility and HTML 5 is a frequent topic there. Changes are hotly debated re their effect on accessibility.
    MS MVP Expression Tutorials & Help http://by-expression.com
    Friday, August 6, 2010 1:37 AM
  • Which working draft? It changes frequently with the last changes just published yesterday. That's what I mean about a moving target.


    The Internet Explorer 9 development group are working hard on HTML 5 support and they are benchmarking that support. Clearly all aspects of the specification can not be as unstable as you suggest or there would be no way for them to proceed. These figures are for the 4th preview release. The rumor is that the first Beta release of IE 9 will be available as early as September.

     

    Friday, August 6, 2010 2:04 AM
  • And just how many people are going to switch to IE 9 as soon as it is released? Look at your web stats and see how many are using IE 6 & IE 7. Windows XP users won't even have the option of switching to IE 9.
    MS MVP Expression Tutorials & Help http://by-expression.com
    Friday, August 6, 2010 2:55 AM
  • And just how many people are going to switch to IE 9 as soon as it is released? Look at your web stats and see how many are using IE 6 & IE 7. Windows XP users won't even have the option of switching to IE 9.
    These are great questions but they don't address the matter of the HTML 5 specification stability. Even if we all agree that Microsoft will not have a single user for their new product, that doesn't change the fact that they are pursuing HTML 5 aggressively using the current draft specification. My point was that their commitment to HTML 5, as it currently is, gives some measure of confidence to the ultimate success of the specification.
    Friday, August 6, 2010 3:08 AM
  • "...they are pursuing HTML 5 aggressively using the current draft specification."

    Which could change at any time, then they'd have to start over on each particular part of the specification that evolved.

    And even if MS is doing such, there is no uniformity across the browsers--not in how well they support HTML5, nor which parts they are working on or supporting, nor in what manner they support or interpret them. From the chart above, it is entirely possible that Safari and Chrome have support for only 1% of the spec in common and that Opera and Firefox support only overlaps by 7%.

    It's nothing but a curiosity at the moment, as far as I'm concerned.


    Some see the glass as half full. Others see the glass as half empty. I see a glass that's clearly twice as large as it needs to be.
    Friday, August 6, 2010 3:30 AM
  • TB, if you follow the links from the test chart you posted, you'll find this, from IE9 developers, about HTML5 (Pay particular attention to the Note):

    http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/ie/ff468705.aspx#_HTML5 :

    Support for some features of the HTML5 Working Draft specification was introduced in Internet Explorer 8, including:

    Internet Explorer Platform Preview builds on the work done on HTML5 compliance in Internet Explorer 8, and implements the following new features:

    Note  It is important to remember that, as of this writing, the HTML5 specification is still in the Working Draft stage. Until it reaches the Candidate Recommendation stage, it could change significantly. For more information, see the latest HTML5 working draft."

    And, if you click through and take a look at the working draft page, note the comment from the W3C:

    "Implementors should be aware that this specification is not stable. Implementors who are not taking part in the discussions are likely to find the specification changing out from under them in incompatible ways. Vendors interested in implementing this specification before it eventually reaches the Candidate Recommendation stage should join the aforementioned mailing lists and take part in the discussions."

    In short, it is not stable, it is not final, and while working on browser support in parallel with the draft development makes sense, it doesn't make HTML5 any more stable. It just means they will be in a better position to jump through the hoops required when it changes.

    Friday, August 6, 2010 3:42 AM
  • All so true Kathy. Also, Ian Hickson, editor of the HTML5 specification, in a May 6th, 2010 interview with TechRepublic:

    Justin James: How much change do you expect HTML 5 to undergo at this point? Can developers base work on the current draft and have relatively few changes to make, or should they treat it as simply an “item of interest” at this point?

    Ian Hickson: The specification isn’t really the deciding factor there; it’s the implementations that decide when something is stable: once something is implemented and shipped, we can’t change it any more! So I would say, if it works in browsers, then it’s safe to use. Then again, if it doesn’t work in browsers, there’s not much point using it anyway!

    Friday, August 6, 2010 4:11 AM
  • @ Cheryl - You can validate HTML5 against the current working draft, which is what I expected EW4's validator to do. 
    Friday, August 6, 2010 8:43 AM
  • I agree with you (and Ian Hickson), Time Bandit.  What matters is when browsers start supporting the new elements / features.  There won't be a specific point in time when it's right to use HTML5.  We can just start using elements as they get widely supported, if we choose to.  

    (Not counting IE) there is already widespread support for: the new structural elements, canvas, SVG's, audio & video tags etc.  These elements won't change, (at least not in the sense that they might disappear altogether) because they are already widely supported.  http://caniuse.com/

    If you don't want to use HTML5 yet that's fine - there is absolutely nothing wrong with that, but if someone decides that they want to use HTML5, I don't think that person should be put off because they don't think it's safe or ready to be used successfully yet.

    Friday, August 6, 2010 9:15 AM
  • Of course you can experiment with and use HTML 5 if you want to. But you also need to test in the range of browsers your users have, and make sure your pages give a satisfactory rendering, not necessarily identical, in them all. Depending on the degree you use newer features, this may mean browser-specific style sheets.

     


    Ian Haynes

    EW V4 Add-Ins
    EW resources, hints and tips
    Friday, August 6, 2010 9:23 AM
  • MSFT has a long history of defying web standards, so i'm not surprised all the MVPs and MSFTies defend EW's lack of html 5 support. If you want an html editor that is forward thinking, you should wonder over to adobe's website and pick up a copy of dreamweaver.
    Friday, August 6, 2010 10:42 AM
  • "MSFT has a long history of defying web standards, so i'm not surprised all the MVPs and MSFTies defend EW's lack of html 5 support. ...wonder (sic) over to adobe's (sic) website and pick up a copy of dreamweaver (sic)."

    Ooooh, name calling. Classy. Many of the people you deride as "MSFTies" already use Dreamweaver, including 3 who have contributed to this thread. And they speak of it openly and often. One of those people runs a Dreamweaver users group.

    But you wouldn't care about that, would you? You're just more interested in name calling. Way to go. Thank you for your contribution. 


    Some see the glass as half full. Others see the glass as half empty. I see a glass that's clearly twice as large as it needs to be.
    Friday, August 6, 2010 12:22 PM
  • @BillPearson - ok, MSFTies was a little harsh, I meant fan boi's.

    With HTML 5 picking up steam, I wanted to see what EW had to offer. With an HTML editor supported by a big company like Microsoft, you'd expect some bleeding edge action. Am I surprised EW doesn't offer HTML 5 support or even a roadmap? No, IE doesn't support HTML 5. I'm venting because I'm getting tired of getting burnt by incompatibility issues with MSFT products. I'm not making this stuff up. Let me just name a few products that "defy" industry standards:

    - Outlook Web Access - All browser that are not IE, go into web access light mode.

    - TFS 2008 doesn't work well in any other browser than IE

    - Sharepoint 2007 = quarks mode = house of pain

    - Silverlight doesn't work in most mobile phone browsers

    - No HTML 5 support in Expressions, not even a road map.

    - IE8 doesn't support HTML 5, but all the other browsers like Firefox, Chrome, Safari, and Opera support at least some element of HTML 5. MSFT releases browser upgrades at a snail pace.

    - SQL Server Analysis Services only works with Windows Authentication

    - BPOS's Office Communicator doesn't work on any other platform than WINDOWS

    Friday, August 6, 2010 1:48 PM
  • @ Cheryl - You can validate HTML5 against the current working draft, which is what I expected EW4's validator to do. 


    Which "current" draft? The one in effect when EW 4 was released? The one published Aug 4? The one that will be published in another month?

    That's my point, it is an evolving specification. Dreamweaver CS 5 doesn't have any HTML 5 support at all other than an extension someone released about a month ago. Adobe has no intention of trying to hit a moving web development target though they have released some Flash to HTML 5 video tools for those targetting iPxx devices.

    EW 4 was released in May http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=05%2F01%2F2010&to= shows changes just since then and usually program stop development some time before they are released.


    MS MVP Expression Tutorials & Help http://by-expression.com
    Friday, August 6, 2010 2:38 PM
  • DotNetSam

    MSFT has a long history of defying web standards, so i'm not surprised all the MVPs and MSFTies defend EW's lack of html 5 support. If you want an html editor that is forward thinking, you should wonder over to adobe's website and pick up a copy of dreamweaver.


    I own and run a Dreamweaver mail list with over 5,700 members and have been at various times an Adobe Community Expert for Dreamweaver. I wrote articles for Adobe. I don't give a flying fart what editor someone uses though I consider those who use Notepad to be crazy. (If you want to use a text editor that's fine but get one that's better than Notepad like UltraEdit, Textmate or one of the hundreds of others.)

    I also have a Mac sitting on my desk, an iPhone in my pocket and over half of the websites I work on host on Linux-Apache. Everything I do on the web is cross platform, cross browser and accessible (well, I've got a few videos I still need to caption but that's another can of worms.) How many operating sytems do you test on and support?

    I've got Adobe CS 5 Web Premium on this computer and Adobe CS 4 Master Collection on my Mac and another PC. I use both Dreamweaver & Expression Web on a daily basis. I requently use both on the same website because each has their strengths and weaknesses.

    Before you tell folks to switch to Dreamweaver do a little checking and you will find that a lot of folks were demanding to know why Dreamweaver CS 5 has NO native support for HTML 5 at all. If you want to use HTML 5 in Dreamweaver you have to go to Adobe Labs, their experimental site and download the CS5 HTML Pack which only works in the very latest version of Dreamweaver. If you want it get it at http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/html5pack.html 

    Fireworks is my graphics editor of choice for the web though I use Photoshop for photography. If I did print then InDesign would be my preference.

    Windows, Expression, OS X , Dreamweaver are all tools. So how about getting off your high horse and quit bashing people you know absolutely nothing about?

    As for you comments about MS having a "long history" of defying web standards, let me give you a little quote from the Web Standards Project re IE 5 written in 2001 from http://archive.webstandards.org/ :

    "Today, with most web users accessing the medium via products like Internet Explorer 5+, Opera 5+, Netscape 6, or Mozilla, we have solid support for many web standards, and The WaSP’s mission would seem to have been accomplished."

    Problem with MS and standards is that by the time IE 6 came out MS won the browser wars so they quit keeping up with evolving standards while other browsers like Opera and Mozilla moved moved with them. Firefox was the result from the Mozilla foundation. Newer browsers that weren't even in existence when that article appeared like Safari & Chrome.

    BTW, if you had spent some time lurking as netiquette recommends you'd find that the MVPs here are some of the bigger MS critics. Sure we appreciate what MS has done, especially the fact that there are a couple of people on the EW dev team who DO come here and answer questions, follow up on people's issue, especially since that ISN'T part of their job. But when MS does something we think is boneheaded like the black interface and the poor way Windows colors display as the only alternative, MS hears about it. However, supporting HTML 5 isn't one of those things that the EW team should be blamed for not doing. Personally, if they had asked my opinion (they didn't) I would have said to not even have the doctype in there.

    If MS or someone else wants to add HTML 5 support then doing so through an add-in is how I think it should be approached because that is a much easier method to update and maintain.

    Expecting "bleeding edge" from any company as big as MS is well, optimistic. If you want bleeding edge look at the articles in Smashing Magazine, work by Mozilla Labs like Bespin (cloud based so easier to update web editor) or Rendera  http://rendera.heroku.com/ another web based editor which tells you to visit the site with Firefox because IE 8 doesn't support HTML 5.

    BTW, the applications you reference are all designed for a closed environment where there is a known OS though the Mac users I know all have no problem using SharePoint, Exchange or other MS platform tools, those are industry standards for enterprise applications. Comparing tools for intranet and enterprise applications to web apps is apples and oranges.

    As for roadmaps to future versions, MS has never published those in regards to Expression Studio nor has Adobe for their Creative Suites so what is your point?

    Both companies have published extensibility models (something we've been pushing for since the first pre-release CTP of Expression Web 1 and has only finally made its appearance in v4) so if you want to create your own extension for HTML 5 - go for it. Someone posting with the handle of "DotNetSam" should be able to do so.

    As for Silverlight, I've got a long wish list that I won't bother to share since this post is already way too long but let's just say mobile is the least of my concerns with it - accessibity is considerable higher on my priority list. Though for what its worth Moonight runs on Chrome and the same folks behind moonlight (linux implementation of dotnet/wpf/silverlight) are working on MonoDroid for Android phones. Steve Jobs won't allow Flash on the iPhone but there has been Silverlight shown on the iPhone http://www.betanews.com/article/Microsoft-worked-with-Apple-for-Silverlight-on-iPhone-says-Goldfarb/1259185079 There is also support on Symbian phones for Silverlight http://www.infoq.com/news/2010/03/Silverlight-Mobile


    MS MVP Expression Tutorials & Help http://by-expression.com
    Friday, August 6, 2010 3:18 PM
  • Hi Cheryl.  I was just responding to your statement "it isn't possible to validate HTML5" when it is possible for those who wish to do so.

    Considering Expression Web's HTML5 "Doctype & Schema" option, I think it's reasonable to expect it to be able to recognize and auto-complete elements like <section>, <article> and <hgroup>.  These are widely supported by all modern browsers, apart from current versions of IE.  Minor changes to the spec wouldn't require Microsoft to alter EW's behaviour when dealing with these elements.

    Friday, August 6, 2010 4:14 PM
  • If you ask me (which no one did) This is just some more of Microsofts marketing tactics to sway things the way they think will be most profitable for them. Other browsers Opera , firefox, safari at least try to forward inovations in different areas of technology thus doing there part to contribute to the whole of  the internet.  But MS and IE have to just not cooperate so that if you do not code for them then it wont work.  and if you want to bring things that some other browsers will support you have to make special allowances for IE.  This monopoly will not last forever.  The Open Source community will prevail over the kingdom in the other Washington.

    With that said I think I' ll just fire up my old NotePad++ and start fight the good fight.

     

    I never NEVER rant.  But that felt pretty good.

     

    PEACE,

    MIKE E

     


    "It's like déjà vu all over again." — Yogi Berra
    Friday, August 6, 2010 4:42 PM
  • If you ask me (which no one did) This is just some more of Microsoft's marketing tactics to sway things the way they think will be most profitable for them. Other browsers Opera , Firefox, safari at least try to forward innovations in different areas of technology thus doing there part to contribute to the whole of  the internet.  But MS and IE have to just not cooperate so that if you do not code for them then it wont work.  and if you want to bring things that some other browsers will support you have to make special allowances for IE.  This monopoly will not last forever.  The Open Source community will prevail over the kingdom in the other Washington.


    Your comment Mike might have been true in the days of Front Page and Internet Explorer 6. I do not think they are valid today. My sense is that Microsoft is  collaborating well with the software community and they are very focused on making the best products possible. IE 8 made big gains on compatibility and  IE 9 is very promising with the latest preview getting a 95% on the Acid Test 3. How else can you explain EW's support for PHP which runs primarily on Linux servers? Windows 7 is an excellent product. I think the times have changed.
    Friday, August 6, 2010 5:10 PM
  • Point well considered and taken.

     

    Thanks,

    MIKE E

     


    "It's like déjà vu all over again." — Yogi Berra
    Friday, August 6, 2010 5:56 PM
  • IE 9 will be compliant with quite a bit of html 5 and EW Intellisense support of html has been concurrent with IE - as far as I know - so I would guess that upon the release of IE 9 that EW will follow along.
    That is exactly right.  What we did in Expression Web 4 was to look at what the IE team was doing with IE 9 to see if we could support whatever it was doing with respect to HTML 5.  We made the necessary code changes and created a schema file that provided a basic subset of the new standard that the IE team was using.  Unfortunately, something must have gotten messed up along the way, as it looks like the schema file we shipped with is broken.  Our test team is looking at an updated version of that file and we hope to make that available via a download when it's been tested to our satisfaction.
    Paul Bartholomew, Microsoft Expression Web
    Sunday, August 8, 2010 3:24 PM
    Moderator
  • MSFT has a long history of defying web standards, so i'm not surprised all the MVPs and MSFTies defend EW's lack of html 5 support.
    Sigh....  See my other post on this thread.  We *did* try to support HTML 5.  You are attributing malice to us when the real answer is that we screwed up (cf. Hanlon's Razor) and we are now trying to fix it.
    Paul Bartholomew, Microsoft Expression Web
    Sunday, August 8, 2010 3:28 PM
    Moderator
  • Hey, don't worry about it, Paul. The rest of his post directed people to use another editor which has no support for HTML5. He's clearly clueless, more interested in slagging than helping.
    Some see the glass as half full. Others see the glass as half empty. I see a glass that's clearly twice as large as it needs to be.
    Sunday, August 8, 2010 4:51 PM
  • Wow, stirred the pot up, but hey, we got an answer from Paul. With IE 9 coming out before 2011, the need for HTML 5 intellisense support will really be needed. I have found the Dreamweaver HTML 5 plug-in to be pretty good. There are some pretty big movements going on in the industry. iPad, iPhone, Android, Google Apps FISMA compliant w/ green flag to sell to government customers, etc... All of these platforms live off HTML 5 and are making great strides. So, my target for my apps is NOT Internet Explorer. I'm living on the bleeding edge.

    "That is exactly right.  What we did in Expression Web 4 was to look at what the IE team was doing with IE 9 to see if we could support whatever it was doing with respect to HTML 5.  We made the necessary code changes and created a schema file that provided a basic subset of the new standard that the IE team was using.  Unfortunately, something must have gotten messed up along the way, as it looks like the schema file we shipped with is broken.  Our test team is looking at an updated version of that file and we hope to make that available via a download when it's been tested to our satisfaction.


    Paul Bartholomew, Microsoft Expression Web"

    I love Microsoft to death, I don't see any problem with making a complaint stating that we want some products to be a little more bleeding edge and compatible. It's tough to explain to a CEO that uses his Mac that you can't use the BPOS messenger service or forcing your users to use IE because of this or that. This stuff comes back to bite later, believe me. I still stick with my earlier remark about a lot of MSFT products are very non-compliant/incompatible. However, I'm seeing improvements in products like Sharepoint 2010.

    Sunday, August 8, 2010 5:36 PM
  • MS learned a lession from not uopdating IE 6 for more than security fixes for, what was it 5 years? Since them MS has been fairly aggressive about new versions of IE and bringing it back to being a standards compliant browser.

    The IE team has been pretty open and in case nobody has looked at who belongs to the W3C, MS is a corporate member.


    MS MVP Expression Tutorials & Help http://by-expression.com
    Sunday, August 8, 2010 6:36 PM
  • Please quit comparing enterprise - controlled environment applications to those designed for the web.
    MS MVP Expression Tutorials & Help http://by-expression.com
    Sunday, August 8, 2010 6:38 PM
  • I think most developers would love to see IE disappear.

    Sunday, August 8, 2010 8:44 PM
  • IE 6, yes they would. IE 8 or even IE 7 are fine, nothing special needed for them. As for CSS 3 I've been waiting for a final published standard for the last half dozen years. I want browsers makers to have a finished standard instead of guestimate of what thefinal spec will be and that goes for HTML 5 as well.

    Regardless of which I am glad that XHTML 2.0 appears to be disappearing in favor of HTML 5 even though it was under development first.


    MS MVP Expression Tutorials & Help http://by-expression.com

    Sunday, August 8, 2010 9:39 PM
  • "I think most developers would love to see IE disappear."

    Nope.  But of course, I make a distinction among the IE versions, whereas the above statement doesn't.

    I'll be glad for the day when IE6 is no longer used.

    Sunday, August 8, 2010 11:09 PM
  • I continually use the "Reformat HTML" option but unfortunately it doesn't work with the HTML5 tags. Is there a way to fix at least that while we wait for better HTML5 support?
    Thursday, August 12, 2010 4:53 AM
  • Yeah, write properly formatted and indented markup as you go. That even increases productivity, completely eliminating the need to ever use Reformat HTML at all.

    cheers,
    scott (who won't let Reformat HTML come within a conceptual mile of his markup)

     


    C'mon, folks. This isn't rocket science, nor neurosurgery. It's "Expression" (singular) "Web" (singular), in that order, followed by a version numeral if you wish to be specific. It is often abbreviated "EW." It is not "Web Expression," "Expressions Web," "Web Expressions," or plain "Expression" or "Expressions." Not using the correct name indicates either ignorance or laziness. Most folks would rather avoid the appearance of either.
    Thursday, August 12, 2010 5:39 PM
  • FWIW.

    W3C has just added experimental html 5 validation to their validator:

    http://www.w3.org/QA/2008/11/w3c_validator_now_with_html5.html

    Cheers

    Saturday, August 14, 2010 7:33 PM
  • Hmm, right, "experimental." Does it support HTML5 validation for IE6 and IE7?

    Sorry, no offense, but as long as a significant percentage of the browsers in use don't support HTML5, and never will, I just don't see the value-add in doing twice as much development work to produce an HTML5 version and another with the same features using currently supported technology. As browser share numbers change, so will the value equation, but right now, and for at least the near future, there's no gain there in worrying about HTML5.

    cheers,
    scott


    C'mon, folks. This isn't rocket science, nor neurosurgery. It's "Expression" (singular) "Web" (singular), in that order, followed by a version numeral if you wish to be specific. It is often abbreviated "EW." It is not "Web Expression," "Expressions Web," "Web Expressions," or plain "Expression" or "Expressions." Not using the correct name indicates either ignorance or laziness. Most folks would rather avoid the appearance of either.
    Saturday, August 14, 2010 11:40 PM
  • That is an arrogant answer and completely worthless.  The question inherently validates the need for Expression Web to support both HTML5 & CSS3.  Reasoning such as yours will keep Expression Web steps behind Dreamweaver which does support both.  The answer should be geared toward when there will be a fix and how can we get it.

    We want a competitive advantage in web development and want Expression to help us get it.

     

    Monday, October 25, 2010 4:07 PM
  • You are replying to an old thread.

    Two points:

    If you had read more recent threads, you'll see there is an addon for EW4 for HTML 5 for those who want to play with it.

    Second: Scott is right that since so many people are using older browsers that do not support the latest HTML5 and CSS3 features (and those are still works in progress even for those that support some), you will have to support the older browsers, which means more work if those features don't gracefully degrade for older browsers without any loss of function or content.  Pointing out that reality is not arrogant.

    Monday, October 25, 2010 4:48 PM
  • You might want to get your facts straight before exposing your ignorance. I have and use both Dreamweaver CS4 and CS5, as do several others of our regular contributors here, and neither version supports HTML5. DW CS5, only, does have an add-on pack that adds some support, but it is not native to DW CS5, and your statement to the contrary is erroneous.

    Furthermore, where is the "competitive advantage" to be gained from producing sites using HTML5 that cannot be viewed in the majority of browsers still in use? Are you going to produce a site for your client and then tell them, "Look at all of this whiz-bang stuff I was able to do using HTML5! Of course, two-thirds of your potential customers won't be able to see any of it, but you don't mind that, do you?"

    Yeah, real competitive advantage there...


    Please remember to "Mark as Answer" the responses that resolved your issue. It is common courtesy to recognize those who have helped you, and it also makes it easier for visitors to find the resolution later.
    Monday, October 25, 2010 4:51 PM
  • Add to that that last week (or two) the W3C recommended not using HTML 5 in a production environment:

    http://www.infoworld.com/d/developer-world/w3c-hold-html5-in-websites-041

     

    What we've all been saying for the past 10 months when people come here complaining about, and bragging about, using HTML 5...


    --
    Chris Hanscom - Microsoft MVP
    On Facebook | Resource Center | Veign's Blog | Web Development Help

    Get a Complete Website Analysis by Veign
    Monday, October 25, 2010 5:03 PM
  • There are HTML 5 add-ins or extensions depending on the preferred terminology for both Expression Web http://gallery.expression.microsoft.com/en-us/Web4HTML5SchemaAddIn and Dreamweaver CS 5 http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/html5pack.html neither has real HTML 5 support out of the box.

    I've seen almost this exact same discussion on the Yahoo Dreamweaver mail list that I own (over 5,700 member last time I checked) on lack of native support and how the manufacturer was crazy not to support an as yet far from finalized specification. Many are screaming for the iPhone/iPad/iPod implementation and don't seem to realize that it won't work in other browsers becaues there isn't an agreeded upon audio or video codec. Only the one that Apple holds the patent on and says will stay "free" until I think 2015 when Apple will decide whether or not to start charging for using the codec. Call me a skeptic that I think using a proprietary protocol is a little foolish at this point.


    MS MVP Expression Tutorials & Help http://by-expression.com & Expression Web forums
    Monday, October 25, 2010 6:37 PM
  • any specificiation that hasn't at least reached the RC status should [not] be in that list


    Totally agree. Your observation about massive script files being plied in the background is correct To score all that garbage, simply browse. However, end of all this code standards indecision not a decade away. More like one year, or two on the outside. The politic is way to complicated for me, but Dan Cedarholm's advice is wait until our Expression product ships with W3 validated HTML5-CSS3 in tandem editor configuration. For now, any of us who curiously design that way are submitting to expermentation. Not personally comfortable with that. ... Wish browsers had a blocking mechanism, which is not going to happen with so many happy experiments brewing. Maybe wait for CSS3 to appear alongside the HTML5 schema add-in currently in the Expression Gallery.
    Saturday, November 20, 2010 6:01 AM
  • looks like the schema file we shipped with is broken.  Our test team is looking
    Paul Bartholomew, Microsoft Expression Web


    http://gallery.expression.microsoft.com/en-us/Web4HTML5SchemaAddIn

    I work at home on a simple machine and really, really need not to dl junkware because my all-to-manufacture standards system is so easily wiped out in ways they never document and cannot afford to document (obviously). Can you please ask Mr. Smith to somewhere near the top of his HTML5 Schema Gallery page clearly note status of the current download with respect to sadly experienced broken "mess...". Also, a little filler on any similar (even sisterly) CSS3 add-in would make great reading while visiting the Gallery. TIA_

     

    Sunday, November 21, 2010 1:50 PM
  • Hi, thanks for the reply, but if that is the case, why does Expression Web 4 offer HTML5 as a Doctype it will accept and validate?


    I must be the most junior junior around here. But your abrupt counter argument has me thinking that Web4 structure is very sweetly supporting HTML5 testing. Further, given the [borderline schizophrenic] sensitivity of my system to intrusive software routines, I'll bet that testing is feeding right back into the lap where it belongs. Big Mother Microsoft is learning first-hand how her children play with code. Kudos!
    Sunday, November 21, 2010 2:35 PM
  • Hi, thanks for the reply, but if that is the case, why does Expression Web 4 offer HTML5 as a Doctype it will accept and validate?


    Question or inquisitive assertion, your post has me thankful. Big Mother Microsoft is mindful of her children's coding. Not just peering: she is validating our progress. Kudos!
    Sunday, November 21, 2010 2:41 PM
  • In this discussion I have found many useful links to ... elsewhere. However, a sociolinguistic process termed hermeneutic has taken over. Lacking empirical direction, the thread has substituted assertion of code assimilation for an evaluation of code application. "aled.co" very specifically explored mechanics of coding HTML5. No replies considered here do approach the technicality of coding using the albeit "broken" HTML5 device (s) provided for forum visitors in the Expression Gallery.

    There was a mention from Paul B. that the HTML device (s) are "broken", and that the "Team" is "looking". Again, a hermeneutic impass.

    I, for one (energetically) look forward to a properly coded HTML5/CSS3 compliment in the Expression Studio interface. This combo is easily handed to the VB and Javacscript interface of Expression Blend at this time. Moving it into the Web4 design interface with HTML web surfaces is, as Ms. Wise so kindly grinds into road rash (trying to make unlearned persistence herein "aware") ... is going to take some time and is intimately connected to what the IE9 browser technology is porting. I look forward to the day when all that we do is peered and validated. Tyranosaurus Rex has stomped that into a collective conscience at W3C. Keep that in mind. Hermeneutically speaking.

    • Proposed as answer by Mike James Tuesday, May 15, 2012 7:22 PM
    Sunday, November 21, 2010 3:10 PM
  • Well, seeing as how HTML5 is 12 years away from adoption--2022 is the goal, and since browser support is spotty at best, and since what browser support there is is for specifications that may change at any time, I don't think Intellisense will be helping you.

    I think you just have to accept that you are way ahead of the curve and you're on your own in many areas.


    Some see the glass as half full. Others see the glass as half empty. I see a glass that's clearly twice as large as it needs to be.


    BP, I quote your entire post in all it's glory. You have hit on the crux of the issue. There is no consistent support, no "standard" for HTML5. Yet. When "standard" appears is irrelevant. Why irrelevant? You have left out a very important detail. Not that the sizing of shrinking and growing boxes will forever be an IE black hole. You just need ... a little imagination.

    Write some nonsense code for your style component and hand it to any North American HTML browser. Try something like <alice class="looking glass"> to activate alice{running:circles;} looking{deeply:down;} glass{always:shiney;}. All your browsers will ignore amazing story lines and display what they can. However, for a special new class act browser on the all-new wabbit-kit codec ...

    I fact, BP, one could say, "the glass is only half as big as it needs to be." Which is where Alice tips in a drop of her magic stuff. "Grow the glasss big. Hurry! It's shining more and more." ... which is the story line taking away more and more of us. Every which way. Hmmm.

    Sunday, November 21, 2010 3:38 PM
  • Hey aled.co,

    the program should validate the markup ~Anna


    http://blogs.msdn.com/anna


    Anna. HTML5 is structured very differently than all preceeding doctypes. This is what we should all be reminding each other. Publish something urgently for a maximum uptake and you can really get away with just <html> and then <body> on some servers. For sites without PHP root kits, <doctype html>. There you go, you're writing HTML5.

    What? Every other standard you have to keep only inside its own syntatx under obscure doctype classifications.

    Note the terms "doctype" and "html" are as ancient as HTML can be. Note also that unlike every predecessor, HTML5 doctype threads support all predecessor HTML terms. Also, HTML 5 is happy inside any previous common doctype. Nothing you know about HTML is off-limit.

    Everything? Not quite. There is a small basket full of simply unused code that is now replaced by designers like us with more robust and useful HTML code. Almost every browser on the market in our region will browse right into an HTML5 page, pick it up pronto.

    Most browsers have been supporting and growing HTML5 for years. Actually, IE with 29% of regional page hits last month has been the only public exception. This year, the code being born in the vast majority of browsers ws formally Christened. HTML5 is as good as standard functionally. It has new and delicate structure. Nurture it accordingly. For the rest, you don't need validation. What you do need is intelligent choices. Insert the new HTML5 selectors "inside" your flavour of [validating] "standard" HTML. If you are able to do that ... if you are sensitive enough to do that, then validation outside the rapidly growing and much bigger than IE market, validation is at best an after-thought. Already supporting HTML5 in your design suite, most of your customers will enjoy your efforts. Remeber, HTML5 picks up and deploys all existing doctypes. HTML5 is the first open document standard.

    Relevant. That is the key word. For a small and growing number of selectors and "behaviors", the IE8 platform is hopelessly outdated. That is why IE9 turns 180 degrees on the competition, supporting 97% of now universal HTML5 selectors. Leaving all the competition in the dust. Universality is the backbone assuring HTML5 acceptance as Release Candidate and as Standard. n fact, it is going to launch with such rapidity, some feel, that the RC-Standard interface may get turned upside down.

    Remind everyone! Doctype says it all. The new HTML5 standard will be much easier for machines to process as simple HTML. However, simplicity in design is already an invitation to monster code infusers from Adobe CS5 and Microsoft Studio4. Sweet and simple, some of us love plain HTML-CSS as ot is truly available for all. But the global web environment, places like Google and Yahoo, are going to very rapidly begin squeezing our system clock speeds. Plastic CD program discs are already relics. HTML5 is the new lightweight and accessible root-hugging tool.

    Lightweight and accessible, the developer community is being pushed agressively to code srtucture both local and remote to deploy "rich" content, built around the new open document structure. Much as we want to hang onto our machines and memory sticks forever, that's not going to happen.

    And perhaps that says something important about humble designers like me. We are definitely back of the bus. Devlopers are already deploying custom HTML5 through script "clouds" for coffee bars. We must wait to spell it out clearly in plain text code as a dedicated "HTML5 document".

    For now, Expression Web4 designers can most efficiently patch in pieces of HTML5 code for the huge browser market outside IE's shrinking user group. I don't think people are out of context browsing with laptops on Starbucks HTML-Kit browsers. IE is installed, but relatively lifeless. From a visual perspective, the color fade-ins and gradients are oh-so subtle in simplicity, stunning in appael, and relatively easy to code. But are they are taking our market away? You can say I am out-of-context, calling HTML5 a standard. Soon as Mr. Smith gets that HTML5 add-in fixed, I'm onto it. And a few good books. Got to have those! Hey, I am already enshrining CSS3 with the same title. 

    What do you call that train travelling at 250 kilometers per hour toward your car on the rail crossing? Tokyo photo op? NOT. Move it.

    Sunday, November 21, 2010 4:56 PM
  • I have been using full html5 and css3 on a fully commercial site (I gave up supporting dinosaurs in IE6 a long time ago (they get a basic page to go with their basic computing)).  I use Modernizer to inject support for IE7+ and older versions of Firefox, Safari etc.  The site works 100% perfectly in all those browsers and also phones and the ipad. 

    The site uses the new tags section, article, nav etc with no issues.

    There is no reason why you can't use the new schema and css3, you just have to be aware about how the site degrades without Javascript and as it is needed for a large portion of the site (tabs, accordion, datepickers etc) the site will pop a warning for non-javascript enabled browsers.

     

    Tuesday, January 11, 2011 12:36 PM
  • Using javascript frameworks to simulate HTML5 support was discussed and if you are willing to have that overhead go for it. I'm not and won't be until the spec is closer to being final and there is are agreed upon codecs. So I"m not exactly sure what your post contributes that was worthy of reviving a thread that has been so throughly hashed out and dead for a considerable length of time.
    MS MVP Expression Tutorials & Help http://by-expression.com & Expression Web forums
    Tuesday, January 11, 2011 4:03 PM
  • DOCTYPE HTML5 advertised - Expect to offer HTML5 elements and validation.
    Solution - Download an HTML5/CSS3 editor or put up with the misgivings of this current version of the application because we want to move forward with the web and use these new and exciting features as they become available.

    User <=IE8 - No HTML5 and no intention to fix
    Solution - Upgrade to IE9 - XP users upgrade to Windows 7 or Vista (Aggggh!) or download a compliant browser and stay on XP.

    Developers <=IE8 - No HTML5 and no intention to fix (Shoot yourself in the foot MS).

    Solution - Display a link for non-compliant browsers (Hidden for compliant browsers) to a page that informs the user that the site is currently fully-functional for them without any additional technologies and they have a basic style sheet (see http://forabeautifulweb.com/blog/about/universal_internet_explorer_6_css/) but in order for them to see the site progressively enhanced to give them a much better experience with the latest web technologies and to increase the security of their user agent, they need to switch to a compliant browser and stay updated with its latest version, which usually incorporates additional new features and technologies; give them a link to all the compliant browser latest versions.

    It's time to teach the World to move forward and for us not to be held back by old user agents and development IDEs that don't cut it.

    Solution for Microsoft

    - Update Expression Web to support HTML5 and CSS3 now.

    - Support IE9 on XP (I've already heard all of the ridiculous excuses. Just get on with it or lose your IE base. Once they switch, they will probably never go back to IE).




    Saturday, March 19, 2011 2:15 PM
  • Did you bother to even read this thread? I'm sorry but not everyone has the option to "upgrade" so your "solution of telling people to upgrade is crap. Especially in light of your demand for an IE 9 version of XP. XP is almost 10 years old and very insecure so if you want people to move on that's the first thing they need to replace.
    Free Expression Web Tutorials
    For an Expression Web forum with without the posting issues try expressionwebforum.com
    Saturday, March 19, 2011 2:46 PM
  • Agreed.  HTML 5 is here now and it's obviously growing considerably with the now released and well received IE9.  Everyone is scrambling to make their code work on the latest I Devices.   XP users are not left behind at all and haven't lost a thing.  All that's needed is a quick download of Chrome, Firefox, Safari etc and you'll be good to go.   
    RJ McNicol
    Saturday, March 19, 2011 2:47 PM
  • Agreed. HTML 5 is here now and it's obviously growing considerably with the now released and well received IE9. Everyone is scrambling to make their code work on the latest I Devices. XP users are not left behind at all and haven't lost a thing. All that's needed is a quick download of Chrome, Firefox, Safari etc and you'll be good to go.

    What are you, about 14 years old? You display a level of immaturity, and of egregious cluelessness about the real world, that is consonant with someone who is still having his laundry done by Mama.

    It is painfully obvious that you have never worked in the corporate world (no, making fries at Mickey D doesn't count), where desktops are completely and thoroughly locked down by IT, and you not only have no choice of operating system or browser, but may find whole categories of sites that are locked out to you.

    It is apparent, as well, that you have never worked with real-world paying clients, who don't really give a damn about what people should be using according to your preachy and wholly unrealistic standards, but want their quilting supplies site, or their appliance parts business, or their handmade head coverings site, or their mayoral campaign site, visible to as many potential customers/voters/whatever as possible. Tell a client that you won't develop a site for them that can be seen properly in 55%–60% of browsers, because it's your personal opinion that they should upgrade, and watch them stare at you in disbelief, and then abruptly end the interview.

    What the hell; go ahead and insist on maintaining this attitude. You're hurting no one but yourself, and after you find yourself unable to land enough contracts to survive, maybe you'll understand that what you want to do is not foremost in the minds of your potential clients. Or maybe not, in which case your business will sink without a trace, and you can just go forth on your glorious crusade, without the encumbrance of paying clients whose needs you must satisfy in order to stay in business. Your choice...

     


    Please remember to "Mark as Answer" the responses that resolved your issue. It is common courtesy to recognize those who have helped you, and it also makes it easier for visitors to find the resolution later.
    Saturday, March 19, 2011 3:18 PM
  • Paladyn, your position is extreme and your rhetoric boarders on abuse. The are many new features, that are part of HTML 5, that can be incorporated to improve the users experience for the 50% of the browsers  that do currently support them, which at the same time can be coded so as to degrade gracefully for older browsers. For a developer to spend time to do this is more work for them granted, but if they chose to do so it is not immoral as you would like us to think.


    Facebook using HTML 5 today

    Saturday, March 19, 2011 5:09 PM
  • Don't put words into my mouth, TB. Nowhere in that post did I say that using HTML5 was immoral, not once. I did say that it was unrealistic to expect users to upgrade their browsers simply because developers would prefer it, which is true partially because many users are constrained and have no choice, and partially because the average Joe Sixpack or Granny Jones user simply doesn't give a damn what browser they're using, and will use whatever came with the machine until it dies.

    I also said, in essence, that it was stupid for a professional developer to target technologies that more than half the browsers in use don't support, if he expected to be able to get clients, anyway. Do you contend that it is not? Yes, you have the choice to build to both HTML4.x/XHTML1.x and to HTML5 if you wish. Fine, if you have the time to take the productivity hit to do so, go right ahead.

    Rounded corners can be implemented without HTML5 or CSS3. I know, because I do it. Shadows and graduated fills can be implemented without HTML5 or CSS3. I know, because I do it. In fact, I can't think of a single feature enabled by HTML5 or CSS3 that cannot be created using current technology, and when it is done that way, it is visible and supported as designed by every browser in the wild that supports current technologies, without duplicate effort.

    So, yeah, if you and RJ want to target HTML5 and CSS3 at present, go right ahead. I prefer to do the job once, using universally-supported technology, and be done with it, instead of dealing with multiple different implementations of a set of "standards" that are not even approaching Recommendation status yet.

     


    Please remember to "Mark as Answer" the responses that resolved your issue. It is common courtesy to recognize those who have helped you, and it also makes it easier for visitors to find the resolution later.
    Saturday, March 19, 2011 5:45 PM
  • Did you bother to even read this thread? I'm sorry but not everyone has the option to "upgrade" so your "solution of telling people to upgrade is crap. Especially in light of your demand for an IE 9 version of XP. XP is almost 10 years old and very insecure so if you want people to move on that's the first thing they need to replace.
    Free Expression Web Tutorials
    For an Expression Web forum with without the posting issues try expressionwebforum.com

    As I said, if they can't upgrade, they are informed that everyone still get a fully-functional site ... so no one is denied content nor the ability to do business with the server web application.

    I agree, XP is old and MS will not give them an HTML5 solution ... so they will switch browsers rather than purchase a new operating system. Take a look at current browser stats to see older IE browsers disappearing rapidly (great news). I guarantee these are XP users switching browsers. They can even keep there old IE devices if they are tied into MS specific applications.

    This is not my solution, it is a solution being adopted by many developers because we want to move forward with web technologies. JavaScript enabled, HTML5, CSS3 user agents approached with progressive enhancement means content for all but those that have the extras get the extras. The upgrade option is just to give everyone a chance to join the party. You should join the party. We're having great fun ;-)

     

    Saturday, March 19, 2011 5:57 PM
  • Fine, if you have the time to take the productivity hit to do so, go right ahead.

    Rounded corners can be implemented without HTML5 or CSS3. I know, because I do it.


    If we are talking about productivity, it takes far less time to implement rounded corners using HTML5 than it does using images. Rounded corners with HTML 5 works for Firefox, Safari, Chrome, Opera and IE9. Users with IE6->IE8  get to see square corners. Clients are told that rounded corners for the obsolete browsers costs more.  Rounded corners on art work for the common header gets the graphical treatment.
    Saturday, March 19, 2011 6:20 PM
  • Oh, well, we have a difference of opinion on this, and as is the case in such circumstances, we'll just have to agree to disagree. As it happens, I am not opposed to HTML and CSS3. I have a personal site I use for playing around with stuff—jQuery, PHP, ASP.NET, WebFonts, and yes, HTML5 and CSS3. And I'll stipulate straight up that HTML5 and CSS3 make some commonly desired design elements easy to implement.

    That said, when I'm working for a real, live, paying client, I would prefer not to have to research to make sure that I have covered all of the moz-, webkit-, and proposed standard variants for a particular effect, when I can implement it easily using graphical effects.

    I am also not satisfied with providing visitors not running the latest browsers a less-satisfactory experience. When I create a design, I want that design, in all of its details, to be available to all visitors.

    Granted, the situation may be different for those without the necessary tools and experience to feel comfortable and be quickly productive working with the graphics. I have the Adobe Design Premium Creative Suite (CS4), and I am very good with Photoshop and Illustrator (I also do print work). I can produce the necessary graphical elements in a very short time, including graphical embellishments that are not even proposed for HTML5 or CSS3. If I did not have those tools, and that knowledge and experience, I can see where I might find HTML5 and CSS3 much more attractive, and enabling.

    So, basically, we just have a philosophical difference in our approach to design and implementation. You're not going to convince me that my approach is wrong, and I don't suppose that I'm going to convince you to the contrary, so there we are.  ;-)

    cheers,
    scott


    Please remember to "Mark as Answer" the responses that resolved your issue. It is common courtesy to recognize those who have helped you, and it also makes it easier for visitors to find the resolution later.
    Saturday, March 19, 2011 6:51 PM
  • If there is anyone on this planet who regularly surfs the web and isn't aware that there are browsers besides IE 6 I think I'd like to meet them.

    I simply don't consider it my business to tell people they need to upgrade their browser. Sorry but those who are interested in upgrading IE and have an OS capable of doing so have already either made an affirmative choice to keep IE 6 (after all if you run Windows update at all you MS would upgrade you unless you specifically opted out) or you don't have the choice because your IT department has removed the ability to do so.


    Free Expression Web Tutorials
    For an Expression Web forum with without the posting issues try expressionwebforum.com
    Saturday, March 19, 2011 8:52 PM
  • My problem is that there is no consistency in how the different browsers implement rounded corners and the need to use:

    border: 1px solid #999999;
    -moz-border-radius: 5px;
    -webkit-border-radius: 5px;
    border-radius: 5px;
    

    I really don't think that is easier to do or maintain than versions that work on every browser.

    Besides, out of curiosity awhile back using HTML 5 rounded corners, drop shadows & gradients. The site didn't look the same in any of the browsers I tested with - Safari (Mac), Chrome, Opera, IE 8 (okay that one I didn't expect to look like the others). My client in the end liked the way it looked in Firefox so I converted the mark-up to CSS 2.1 and used a few images in order to get it to look basically the same in all the browsers as it did in Firefox 3.4.


    Free Expression Web Tutorials
    For an Expression Web forum with without the posting issues try expressionwebforum.com
    Saturday, March 19, 2011 9:03 PM
  • Here is a nice site for getting the radius syntax right: http://border-radius.com

    What would be a really nice feature for EW 5 is the ability to ask for a rounded corner and have it generate all the correct CSS.

    Cheryl, I've reread this thread and I couldn't find where anyone had suggested "to tell people they need to upgrade their browser". I think the point was that using some features of HTML 5 could be done without loosing those using IE6 browsers.

     


    Saturday, March 19, 2011 9:25 PM
  • Ouch, I'm sorry I struck a nerve with you Paladyn.  Just making an observation as to what I'm seeing.  I'm in my 50s, not a kid and in the corporate world and have been involved in web and tech since the mid 80s.  Just my opinion tis all.  Have a nice day.
    RJ McNicol
    Saturday, March 19, 2011 9:26 PM
  • Ouch, I'm sorry I struck a nerve with you Paladyn.  Just making an observation as to what I'm seeing.  I'm in my 50s, not a kid and in the corporate world and have been involved in web and tech since the mid 80s.  Just my opinion tis all.  Have a nice day.
    RJ McNicol

    Please excuse Scott for being a little surly this week RJ. I think his dog died or something. By next week I'm sure he'll be back to wrapping his bitter pills in a nice fat coating of sugar. 
    Saturday, March 19, 2011 9:52 PM
  • Cheryl, you would be surprised to know that there are people that regularly surf the web and don't even know what a browser is. I once had a client in Australia that was having some problems viewing some stuff on a particular website and he was unable to tell me what browser he was using. He didn't know what a browser was. After telling him to click on the help button and tell me what version of the browser he was using he said "how do I do that?". I never was able to get an answer out of him.
    Saturday, March 19, 2011 10:29 PM
  • brave.heart approx 10 hours prior to this post said:

    Solution - Display a link for non-compliant browsers (Hidden for compliant browsers) to a page that informs the user that the site is currently fully-functional for them without any additional technologies and they have a basic style sheet (see http://forabeautifulweb.com/blog/about/universal_internet_explorer_6_css/) but in order for them to see the site progressively enhanced to give them a much better experience with the latest web technologies and to increase the security of their user agent, they need to switch to a compliant browser and stay updated with its latest version, which usually incorporates additional new features and technologies; give them a link to all the compliant browser latest versions.

    Sure sounds like telling people to upgrade their browser when you are displaying such a message only to those using a browser you think they shouldn't be using.


    Free Expression Web Tutorials
    For an Expression Web forum with without the posting issues try expressionwebforum.com
    Saturday, March 19, 2011 11:20 PM
  • TreeTops, and you think that person is going to upgrade their browser because of some message on a web page? If they run Windows Update they'll have a newer browser, if they don't then they run whatever shipped with their computer and won't change it regardless.
    Free Expression Web Tutorials
    For an Expression Web forum with without the posting issues try expressionwebforum.com
    Saturday, March 19, 2011 11:21 PM
  • TreeTops, and you think that person is going to upgrade their browser because of some message on a web page? If they run Windows Update they'll have a newer browser, if they don't then they run whatever shipped with their computer and won't change it regardless.
    It's not just TreeTops with that misguided thought Cheryl. Microsoft is running down that path as well, along with 250 other co-conspirators :



    The nerve of those people........






    Sunday, March 20, 2011 4:15 AM
  • Well EW4 SP1 has nice HTML 5 support now and 5 is all I seem to read about in the press these days and it seems a lot of the front edge people like Zander are pushing it so its not really so crazy to be looking at it.

    Many years ago I remember some guy ranting on a blog about supporting Netscape 4 and how all the corporate guys use Netscape. How long was early HTML a work in process? I suppose its a good idea to support the old technology and browsers but its a bad idea to hold back too. We do not support Netscape 4 or IE 4 or 5 anymore either. Yes there will be corporate IT people clinging to IE6 and there will be people clinging to film or VHS too. Scotts argument while partialy valid at present has a shelf life of a few years perhaps but the momentum of progress will force even those diehards to change. You know- just like Frontpagers are forced to change.  

    Tuesday, March 22, 2011 1:05 AM
  • IE 9 Crashes often.
    foxjazz
    Wednesday, April 6, 2011 6:12 PM
  • For you. I haven't experienced that issue, nor have many others, judging from the reports I have read.

    One thing you should check into is any add-ins that you have installed (toolbars, BHOs, etc.). That is one thing that can cause problems for IE.

    IE9's installation does not (or didn't for me) disable existing installed add-ins, so if your installation is misbehaving, try disabling all of your add-ins. If that resolves the crashing issue, re-enable them one at a time until you find the guilty party. Then either uninstall it or look online to see if there is an updated version released for compatibility with IE9.

    cheers,
    scott


    Please remember to "Mark as Answer" the responses that resolved your issue. It is common courtesy to recognize those who have helped you, and it also makes it easier for visitors to find the resolution later.
    Wednesday, April 6, 2011 6:38 PM
  • I did, use chrome mostly. IE9 crashes often.
    foxjazz
    Wednesday, April 6, 2011 6:42 PM
  • IE 9 Crashes often.
    foxjazz
    Maybe you should try using firefox. I have only good experiences with it.
    Friday, July 29, 2011 7:02 AM