Re: [docbook-apps] Re: html 5, as a target

[Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>]

On Monday, August 16, 2010 01:59:44 am Jirka Kosek wrote:
> Larry Garfield wrote:
> >> These elements are not supported in IE6/7 and they can't be CSS styled
> >> there without using supplement Javascript library.
> > 
> > So?  That doesn't mean they are valueless.  There's nothing wrong with
> > using those supplemental libraries if appropriate.
> 
> From all perspectives (performance, bandwidth, security, ...) it is
> better to use
> 
> <div class="nav">
> 
> then
> 
> <nav> + some funky Javascript

But <nav> without needing JS is better still.  So for those producers that 
choose to use it, their HTML5-supporting users will get a superior experience 
while non-HTML5-using users will get an inferior but still functional 
experience.  I guess I'm still missing how this is a problem.

> > So what's the downside of an HTML5-based output option (not required for
> > all output, but an option alongside the various other targets) that
> > people can use when their particular user base is HTML5-capable enough? 
> > Wouldn't the easy availability of such a target help push HTML5 forward
> > by providing more HTML5- dependent content, creating a demand among
> > users for better HTML5-supporting browsers?  That would mean people
> > viewing DocBook output would, when they upgrade their browser, poof, get
> > the new hotness because it's already there waiting for them?
> 
> Hmm, I still don't know what HTML5 functionality you would like to see
> in DocBook generated content. If there will be no additional
> functionality there is no reason for switching to HTML5.

Better SEO through more semantic markup seems like a perfectly good bit of 
functionality to me.

--Larry Garfield