What are the pros and cons of adopting HTML 5 now for a site redesign?

views:

1578

answers:

+4 Q:

What are the pros and cons of adopting HTML 5 now for a site redesign?

Hi all,

I'm working on a large ites re-write that has now come to included a redesign. I have been reading up on HTML 5 and wanted to know what cons are out there to have me avoid adopting it for this design implmentation? The design needs to work in A-grade browsers (yes including IE6 :( ), so I'm wondering how / etc will be rendered (inline/block etc.).

I'd also like to know the pros so that I can sell it to any conservatives within the business?

Thanks Denis

+5 A:

If we disregard the things which are unchanged since HTML 4.01…

Pros? Not a lot. There are a few things which work in a minority of browsers. There are a few things which work in a minority of browsers but with added JavaScript can support most browsers in a relatively sensible way.

As for cons…

The whole spec is still a draft, and subject to change.
Practically nothing in the spec is supported consistently across browsers (and faking it with JS fails when JS isn't around)
QA tools are immature and often lag behind the specification

It's useful as something to experiment with, but I wouldn't build a mainstream website with it.

David Dorward 2009-08-19 09:02:39

The spec’s now in last call, so I think it’s a bit more stable. The validator (http://html5.validator.nu/) seems pretty good too. Still little IE support for the new stuf in HTML5 without JavaScript though.

Paul D. Waite 2010-02-02 18:53:13

There are no cons - most of the things will work just as they do in XHTML 1.0 or HTML 4.01. Pros will slowly come in next few years, but bring more semantics (and somehow easier understanding of the content by search engine bots from SEO point of view). HTML 5 moreover enables designers to use any web fonts (not just the limiting basic five such as Arial/Helvetica, Verdana, Times New Roman etc.)

see this as well:

http://www.alistapart.com/articles/semanticsinhtml5/

http://www.zeldman.com/2009/07/13/html-5-nav-ambiguity-resolved/

http://www.zeldman.com/2009/07/20/web-fonts-html-5-roundup/

dusoft 2009-08-19 09:03:32

Webfonts? Oh please. Browser support isn't there, and it sounds like something more likely to appear in CSS 3 than HTML 5. As for there being no cons, there are plenty of cons. The lack of quality QA tools for a start.

David Dorward 2009-08-19 09:11:45

oh, please?! Am I saying something about immediate support? Hell, no! I am talking about horizon of three to ten years. get real.

dusoft 2009-08-19 12:56:22

The question says "now"

David Dorward 2009-08-19 13:22:14

@font-face has nothing to do with HTML5, it is a CSS property.

cpharmston 2009-08-19 14:45:07

Must read http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2009/05/26/html-5-now-or-never/

Webbisshh 2009-08-19 09:05:39

Interesting that the article claims that is so fond of canvas. I wouldn't touch the thing today, it is an accessibility nightmare (for now, I'm hoping that will be fixed).

David Dorward 2009-08-19 09:07:47

If you are looking at implementing a HTML 5 layout, you may find http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2009/08/04/designing-a-html-5-layout-from-scratch/ useful - combine it with http://remysharp.com/2009/01/07/html5-enabling-script/ to try and get Internet Explorer support.

Richy C. 2009-08-19 09:16:19

+1 A:

Pros:

The more sites are using it, the faster we'll have a reliable spec and support across browsers. So just by building your new site with HTML 5, you help speeding up the advancement of web technologies for all of us.

Cons:

Incomplete QA tools
Incomplete native browser support

The argument that the whole spec is still a draft doesn't really count. Just look at CSS. Even the latest changes to the CSS 2.1 recommendation still have draft status.

basti 2009-08-19 12:58:41

CSS 2.1 is a Candidate Recommendation, not a Draft.

David Dorward 2009-08-19 13:21:43

You're right. But the latest version from April 2009 still has some corrections in draft status. Also, we didn't stop using CSS 2.1 between 2005 and 2007, when the whole spec returned from CR to draft temporarily. I just wanted to make clear that it doesn't really matter if a standard is rc or draft--it's only a recommendation after all.

basti 2009-08-20 06:37:40

+1 A:

If you want to use the HTML 5 specific elements, take a look at http://ejohn.org/blog/html5-shiv/. This approach allows you to use the HTML in browsers that don't support them now.

hofo 2009-09-28 16:16:16

+1 A:

HTML5 isn’t one thing. There are some parts of HTML5 you can use right now.

For instance, you can change your doctype to the HTML5 one (<!doctype html>). Boom. Your document is now HTML5. Because the HTML5 spec was based on a lot of work figuring out what browsers already do, things like this just work. So, if you prefer the HTML5 syntax, feel free to do that now.

As for the new elements, as has been mentioned, they’re lacking support in IE. You can shim quite a lot of support for HTML5 into IE with JavaScript, if you’re happy with that.

Dive into HTML5 is well worth a read to get you up to speed, particularly Chapter 3.

Paul D. Waite 2010-02-02 18:51:58

ansaurus

tags:

views:

answers:

What are the pros and cons of adopting HTML 5 now for a site redesign?

related questions