W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2015

Re: [whatwg] HTML6 proposal for single-page apps without Javascript

From: Jonathan Garbee <jonathan@garbee.me>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 07:04:48 -0400
Message-ID: <CANCFA+Fxbvx8bC9JkDJFOrcSZ5PyLtyUJ2tvoP5SM4DtNSC49g@mail.gmail.com>
To: whatwg@whatwg.org, public-html@w3.org
The buzz mostly comes from throwing of "HTML6" into the title. HTML5 is a
buzzword and this creates new buzz for the "next version" to act as
click-bait for ad views. It also went viral from the mention since people
were mocking the idea of HTML6 (and the single-page app system proposed.)
As far as I know, HTML6 won't ever be an actual thing for any foreseeable
time to come. HTML5 is now the "Living Standard" of HTML and will continue
on indefinitely until it dies.

The idea is interesting yes, however it currently ends up in a sticky
situation. You are recreating custom elements using HTML only and they
aren't as expansive. Most of the conversation I have seen around this topic
(while it is little) boils down to this as to why it isn't worth having.

Your thoughts on JS Frameworks all trying to do this and failing, is why
new standards are being made to address it. These are the pieces of web
components [1]. Once full browser support exists for these JS will have
direct power over what the frameworks are doing under the hood. With the
bonus of any frameworks using the standards creating inter-compatible
components with other technologies if they do things well enough.

For right now, the proper move isn't to get rid of JS for these actions but
let browser vendors know that developers what the web component features.


[1] http://webcomponents.org/

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 6:11 AM, Bobby Mozumder <mozumder@futureclaw.com>

> > On Mar 23, 2015, at 5:33 AM, Nils Dagsson Moskopp <
> nils@dieweltistgarnichtso.net> wrote:
> >
> > XForms, Microdata and XSLT all do different things. Note that no widely
> > used browser supports XForms in its default configuration; while Chrome,
> > Firefox, Internet Explorer, Safari and Opera all support XSLT. Can you
> > explain the “clear usability & design issues” you have seen in XSLT?
> >
> > If so, please do.
> There’s no locally persistent model object. It’s not an MVC framework.
> It’s a view layer.
> And it’s not just me.  There’s a reason Angular, React, Ember, and so on
> don't use XSLT in trying to solve the single-page app problem, probably
> because it doesn’t have a locally persistent model object.
> > I certainly did not. I would like to see an implementation of your
> > proposal and several demonstrations. Do you have something on hand?
> Are you familiar with MVC design patterns?  This would be what it is.
> Sorry, don’t have an implementation on me.  What’s the process going
> forward?  Do people need to write a web browser for every proposal?
> > I agree in that buzz does not necessarily mean your proposal has merit.
> Did you ask the people talking about it?  What were their opinions?
> -bobby
> ---
> Bobby Mozumder
> Editor-in-Chief
> FutureClaw Magazine
> mozumder@futureclaw.com <mailto:mozumder@futureclaw.com>
> +1-240-745-5287
> www.futureclaw.com <http://www.futureclaw.com/>
> twitter.com/futureclaw <https://www.twitter.com/futureclaw>
> www.linkedin.com/in/mozumder <http://www.linkedin.com/in/mozumder>
Received on Monday, 23 March 2015 11:05:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:46:12 UTC