[RFC|Merged] HTML5 doctype

[igorw]

This RFC is related to Prosilver Overhaul/Modernization, which was pushed back to 3.2. Now, the doctype is just a very small subset of that, which has minimal impact. It will however allow us to gradually take advantage of HTML5 features.

Changing the doctype doesn't seem like a big deal. But if we do it, it means we have the intention to support newish standards and technologies, eventually.

The main reason I want it is data-attributes, which make refactoring the existing JS to use jQuery somewhat easier and cleaner.

It also allows MOD authors to use this stuff.

Quoting the ticket here:

Compatibility? The HTML5 boilerplate http://html5boilerplate.com provides some tricks to force latest rendering engines in all of the IEs.

Ticket: http://tracker.phpbb.com/browse/PHPBB3-10258
Patch: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/266

[Meis2M]

very good idea. i like it

subsilver2 is too?

[Oleg]

Will this break validation?

[Sierron]

Advantage of what things of html5? Not that i would care about IE, but everything under IE9 doesn't support new html5 things like audio and video tags.

[Vinny]

It will however allow us to gradually take advantage of HTML5 features.

I liked.
I think that the styles will be more modern.

It also allows MOD authors to use this stuff.

I think a modification to attach with drag and drop directly into the browser , it would be great. Run multimedia directly on the message with audio and video features. Among other things with HTML5.

very good idea. i like it

subsilver2 is too?

Yes, do you seen the patch?

Advantage of what things of html5? Not that i would care about IE, but everything under IE9 doesn't support new html5 things like audio and video tags.

If you look at the patch, you will see only the header has been changed to HTML5, no other element was modified, perhaps in the future with the advancement in the development of HTML5.

Compatibility? The HTML5 boilerplate http://html5boilerplate.com provides some tricks to force latest rendering engines in all of the IEs.
<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge,chrome=1">

I've been using this for a while and it works. Yes, even in IE6.

Example: This style has been developed in HTML5 and CSS3, works fine in IE7-8. I have no problem in using even if it is little.

[Sierron]

I'm not saying in any way that i don't like the idea. To be honest, I really like it. I think I just overread a part of the op post.

After all it would be a small chance for now, but I guess later there is going to be a lot of changes to make things more html5 conform.

[igorw]

subsilver2 is too?

Yes.

Will this break validation?

Indeed, there are a few little things that need fixing. Thanks for bringing this up, some of the meta tags have been deprecated, and HTML5 is in fact stricter on enforcing these. I've just updated the patch, removing the offending ones. Remaining is 'copyright' in the docs, I still need to figure out how to best replace it.

Advantage of what things of html5? Not that i would care about IE, but everything under IE9 doesn't support new html5 things like audio and video tags.

Sure, older browsers do not support new JS APIs. IE6 even needs a hack to be able to display new HTML5 elements properly. So using these things will need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. In most cases it's possible to 'gracefully degrade', eg. it still works in legacy browsers, just without fancy features.

[igorw]

The patch has been updated, it now validates.

[A_Jelly_Doughnut]

Worrying about IE6 is absurd at this point. Google announced not so long ago that they were dropping IE6 support this summer. (July 31?)

In general, I'm not sure that HTML5 provides anything that will actually be used, but the work seems to already be done

[Oleg]

This RFC does not at all state which browsers it was tested on.

Which browsers do we officially support? Which of them were tested with the current version of the patch?

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

Why is the removal of image toolbar meta safe?