[RFC|Merged] HTML5 doctype

[/a3]

Yes, after the last discussion I do agree with the change of doctype. I believe HTML5 is soon to be heading into Last Call status, which would almost be certain by the time phpBB 3.2 is released, so the idea that phpBB would be using an "incomplete" doctype would no longer be relevant.

[nickvergessen]

Why is the removal of image toolbar meta safe?

... some of the meta tags have been deprecated ...

+1 for integration, we don't have to use it really, but it is always nice for modifications

Yes, after the last discussion I do agree with the change of doctype. I believe HTML5 is soon to be heading into Last Call status, which would almost be certain by the time phpBB 3.2 is released, so the idea that phpBB would be using an "incomplete" doctype would no longer be relevant.

where did you read when the next version is released Oo

[/a3]

Yes, after the last discussion I do agree with the change of doctype. I believe HTML5 is soon to be heading into Last Call status, which would almost be certain by the time phpBB 3.2 is released, so the idea that phpBB would be using an "incomplete" doctype would no longer be relevant.

where did you read when the next version is released Oo

I found it at a blog of someone who gets involved with the WHATWG.

[nickvergessen]

I ment phpBB 3.2

[igorw]

Which browsers do we officially support?

Good question.

Which of them were tested with the current version of the patch?

I tested with:

• IE6
• IE7
• Safari 5
• Firefox 5
• Opera 11
• Chrome 14

X-ua-compatible meta looks like it was important, then it was deleted.

We had this in 3.0 for a while, to force IE8 into IE7 rendering mode (due to some textarea scrolling bug). Then got rid of it. The reason I added it to this patch is that it is in the [url=html5boilerplate.com]HTML5 boilerplate[/url]. It forces IE to always use the latest rendering engine. It also activates google chrome frame if present.

However, it's essentially useless, because it's only supported by IE8+, which will render the HTML5 doctype in standards mode anyway. IE6 and 7 will render it in "almost standards mode" which, according to wikipedia, results in "non-standard table cell height rendering". I couldn't find any difference in IE7's rendering of tables, so it seems to be a non issue.

Thus, X-ua-compatible is not needed.

Meta encoding also looks suspicious, which browsers support it? What happens when the web server declares content type to be iso-8859-1 and there is a meta encoding of utf8, which browsers would correctly render the page in utf8?

If a 'charset=xxx' is added to the Content-Type header, it will always take precedence, according to this document (not sure if this changed since then). Since we always send the charset in the header, the meta should in fact not even be needed.

Why is the removal of image toolbar meta safe?

All that imagetoolbar does is disable the IE6 'feature' of an ugly menu when hovering over images. Any objections to removing it?

I believe HTML5 is soon to be heading into Last Call status

Nope. Basically "HTML5" is now a living standard, renamed to "HTML". So there is no set-in-stone standard, it is constantly evolving.

[naderman]

Meta encoding also looks suspicious, which browsers support it? What happens when the web server declares content type to be iso-8859-1 and there is a meta encoding of utf8, which browsers would correctly render the page in utf8?

If a 'charset=xxx' is added to the Content-Type header, it will always take precedence, according to this document (not sure if this changed since then). Since we always send the charset in the header, the meta should in fact not even be needed.

This has always been one of these funny little things: How would you even be able to read the document to find the meta tag if you don't already know what encoding the document was sent in? So let's just get rid of it

I'm also in favour of switching to html5.

[igorw]

Yeah, the meta tag really is pointless. Removing... done.

[/a3]

I ment phpBB 3.2

Ahh.

What I meant is that phpBB 3.0 has been out for a few years... phpBB 3.1 will either be out this year or next year (probably), and so phpBB 3.2 will be at least a few years away. By this time, it is almost certain that HTML5 be in Last Call status unless serious issues are found in the standard.

[Oleg]

Per earlier posted http://blog.whatwg.org/html-is-the-new-html5, we will never be able to support any specification of html (5+) completely because such specifications will no longer exist.

[naderman]

Current patch looks good to me. Shall we mark this RFC as accepted and merge?