Bruce Lawson's personal site

Rant: HTML5 != CSS 3

Trying out my new Ranting Hat, a present from Japan from Nedjma. Please note that rants are just that, and not necessarily eloquent or factual. (And I know that Eric Meyer and Jeffrey Zeldman are not the only two social liberals in the USA; I’ve actually met the other three.)

Oh, and do I have to say that this is a joke, is personal and nothing to do with my lovely employers at Opera? Unfortunately, I probably do.

(I’ll transcribe it when I’m not so tired)
Transcription thanks to the splendid Karen Mardahl, follow her at @stcaccess.

(Last Updated on )

Buy "Calling For The Moon", my debut album of songs I wrote while living in Thailand, India, Turkey. (Only Β£2, on Bandcamp.)

30 Responses to “ Rant: HTML5 != CSS 3 ”

Comment by Sam

Great rant Bruce.

@Richard They are both W3C specifications

@Chris I can produce wind that is mighty but only I think it divine πŸ™‚

Comment by Jim R. Wilson

I agree that an <a> tag just for transition effects is wrong semantically, though it was traditionally necessary in order to support certain basic browser functionality on old browsers. For instance, IE 6 will not respond to :hover for any element that is not an anchor – therefore one had to use anchors liberally, or implement rollover effects using JS. I think this is likely a case where traditions are bleeding over into current practice, despite better options being available.

Comment by PeteW

Lovely. Especially the “that’s why they have different … names!” bit – been saying that for ages. πŸ™‚

We’re all missing a trick, too – Joe Entrepreneur is just waiting to be sold “Web 3.0” sites, but simply won’t understand all this HTML5+CSS3+(etc.) malarkey. Apparently, “Web 3.0” has been used to mean the Semantic Web (like that’s going to happen in a hurry) – that seems like premature labelling given the new web design paradigms these breaking technologies are likely to generate. There’s an obvious need for an umbrella term here, and it’s a marketing need as much as a techie one – so why not “Web 3.0”?

Comment by Nedjma

Wahaha! I love the “you’re doing a number two on the legacy of Zeldman and Meyer every time you confuse HTML5 and CSS”!

You should definitely post more videos. Such talent. Such verve.

Comment by Billee D.

Wow! That was absolutely spot on and had me weeing (or possibly number twoing) myself with laughter. You really should do this more often, Bruce. Thank you!

Comment by Chris Wharton

Genius rant. It definitely is a topic worth clarifying. If I had a pound for every time somebody linked HTML5 % CSS3 together – well I’d be at least 20 quid up!

Comment by Michal

Brilliant! Not to mention educational value.
Comments 3 and 4 LOL!!!
I second 10. Even better: a rant a day to keep the doctor away.
Thanks again for a good laugh πŸ™‚

Comment by Bill Lees

Nice ranting Bruce, but I’m afraid I was finding it hard to care about HTML5 or CSS. Are you going to be ranting about something that actually matters soon? πŸ˜‰

Comment by DejaHeckler

Usually I’m painfully embarrassed for people who rant on the yubes, but that was friggin amazing.

PS Did you record it in HTML5? That’s so neat with the captions and everythingers!

Comment by Bruce

Nah, that’s just YouTube with captioning. But I will be demoing how to do accessible html5 video with captions, falling back to captioned ouTube video for older browsers at Disruptive Code in Stockholm in a couple of weeks, and will write that up here, too

Comment by DejaHeckler

And here I thought I was asking an intentionally stupid question. Heckle fail.

Man, all this HTML5/AJAX awesomeness is making me think I need to quit this copywriting gig. Code was way more fun.

Leave a Reply

HTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong> . To display code, manually escape it.