Talk:HTML5

Is the "Cleanup" to-do done?

Latest comment: 6 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

The to-do list above includes "Cleanup : Distinction between W3C's HTML5 and WHATWG's HTML". Has this item been accomplished by the addition of the table in the new section Differences between the two standards? Ennex2 (talk) 01:31, 19 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

I have now removed that item from the to-do list. Ennex2 (talk) 00:25, 9 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Ennex2: Thanks. I did much of that cleanup job, but wasn't aware of the to-do list.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  11:45, 9 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

I've put a similar TODO back up. This article seems confused about whether it's topic is HTML5 or the HTML living standard.Metaquanta (talk) 07:29, 25 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

Confusing first sentence

Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

"HTML5 is a software solution stack that defines the properties and behaviors of web page content by implementing a markup based pattern to it."

So we have a stack implementing a pattern to content, thereby defining properties and behaviors of content.

I am mystified. Surely this can be stated more clearly, perhaps without the buzzy word "solution". -- FIPAR (talk) 21:25, 14 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

It's really bad and didn't use to be. You should find the most recent clearer version and put it back. Metaquanta (talk) 07:31, 25 December 2019 (UTC)Reply
Done. Restored the version that preceded this:[1]. Metaquanta (talk) 05:15, 21 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

Was the recommendation retired?

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This sentence says the recommendation was retired: "The W3C recommendation of HTML5 was retired[.]" Was the recommendation retired or was HTML5 retired? Timhowardriley (talk) 16:03, 16 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Merging “Features and APIs” and “Features” sections

Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello,

These two similar sections exist at the same level in the hierarchy and follow each other. I think that they should be merged. However, some elements are only present in one section, other are in both, their organisation is not the same (by working group versus by type), some are only propositions. Maybe someone with better knowledge and writing skills could better organise this article? --Bischnu (talk) 10:14, 19 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.