HTML5 test ,,,,please coment :)

[tek_heretik]

Yep, I gotz da sound, like you said, kinda low but it works.

[vinnywright]

Yep, I gotz da sound, like you said, kinda low but it works.

cool thanks for the input ......did the favicon.ico show up? (the little icon for the web site)

VINNY

[tek_heretik]

cool thanks for the input ......did the favicon.ico show up? (the little icon for the web site)

VINNY

Yes, favicon worked, blue (or black?) with purple something er other in it, lol.

[vinnywright]

Yes, favicon worked, blue (or black?) with purple something er other in it, lol.

LOL ,,,, yup ageed it kneeds work , but in my defence it was 3 min in Kiconedit just to see if I could get one and then 3-4 min with imagemagic to reformat (1st time) and another 4-5 reading up on the right coding to put in the index.html ,,,,,,,,in other words just a quickie to see if I could

VINNY

[tek_heretik]

LOL ,,,, yup ageed it kneeds work , but in my defence it was 3 min in Kiconedit just to see if I could get one and then 3-4 min with imagemagic to reformat (1st time) and another 4-5 reading up on the right coding to put in the index.html ,,,,,,,,in other words just a quickie to see if I could

VINNY

Not knocking it, just reporting, it's all good.

[vinnywright]

Not knocking it, just reporting, it's all good.

and I appreciate it ,,, thank you

VINNY

[SteveRiley]

But IE is the opposite. For Firefox, Opera, Safari, Google Chrome there's no reason not to update, so their rendering machines are up to date, unless people really choose to block updates. As soon as every rendering machine supports a certain css/html/svg/... feature, you can start using it. Or if there's a bug in a rendering machine (they all have), the bug gets repaired sooner or later.

On the other hand: in IE 6 nothing (nothing!) has been updated or repaired concerning trident, their rendering machine. Every bug in trident that existed when IE 6 came out, still exists. Every missing feature still misses. Same goes for every version of IE.

Indeed, the rendering engines in the newer versions of Firefox et. al. are more capable than the engines in the older versions. Just like IE 6 can't handle some of the fancy stuff that IE 10 renders perfectly, Firefox 3.6 can't handle some of the stuff that Firefox 18 renders perfectly.

With the exception of IE, other browsers are simply applications that can upgraded as individual users see fit. This isn't the case with IE. It's a fundamental component of the operating system. As such, updates and functionality changes take on a different maintenance character. Because XP is supported for 10 years, Microsoft must maintain the original version of IE that it shipped with for the same amount of time.

5) The problem really lies with the fact that Microsoft should have never developed such a crappy browser in the first place, it have caused nothing but trouble for basically everyone on the internet. The current versions are better, but no where near as complete (spec compliance wise) as the and if they cannot even make their current version spec compliant then how are they going to add to their old versions to make them more spec compliant.

Basically Microsoft screwed up big time with developing their browser in the past and there is not much they can do about it nowadays so web developers are still paying the price and probably will do for awhile to come.

Precisely. The bundling of IE as a base operating system component is an excellent example of how to do it wrong.

[ronw]

Precisely. The bundling of IE as a base operating system component is an excellent example of how to do it wrong.

Unless your goal is customer lock-in.

[SteveRiley]

Unless your goal is customer lock-in.

Most commercial software and hardware firms have that as a goal. Doesn't mean I like it, though.

Thing is, Windows already comes with multiple rendering engines. Tasman was used by IE for Mac, and at the time was considered a much better engine. Other Microsoft products come with yet other engines. iexplore.exe could really be used with any engine, so a better approach would have been to keep the old Trident around for app-compat but also allow the substitution of newer engines. But that lessens lock-in guarantees, so...sigh...

[Detonate]

It works fine for me in Mint 14, Mate DE, FF 18.0.

Once you have the procedure fine tuned to do this, I would very much like to see a "HowTo". Might want to try this myself.

[james147]

It works fine for me in Mint 14, Mate DE, FF 18.0.

Once you have the procedure fine tuned to do this, I would very much like to see a "HowTo". Might want to try this myself.

While you wait for the tutorial I would suggest getting familiar with HTML and CSS (possibly javascript if you want interactive pages) as knowing how they work will make following any tutorial on them easier. That is if you are not already familiar with them.

[vinnywright]

It works fine for me in Mint 14, Mate DE, FF 18.0.

Once you have the procedure fine tuned to do this, I would very much like to see a "HowTo". Might want to try this myself.

it so super easy it's ridicules.......you can look at the page source on the /html5test page and see it .

all I did was take the code from the exampel on this page HTML 5 video example and removed the lines to the .mp4 and the .ogg vids as I just made a .webm one

so it looked like this

<video controls="controls" autoplay="autoplay">
<source src="desktop2.webm" type="video/webm" />
</video>

as long as the .webm video is in the same directory (folder) as the index.html that is trying to display it there is no need to include the path to it.
the entire page is no more than this

<html>
<head>
<center>
<title>A test of HTML5</title>
<meta content="">
<style></style>
</head>
<body bgcolor="green">
<h1>A test of HTML5</h1>

<h3>so here is my first webm vid,just for a test </h3>

<video controls="controls" autoplay="autoplay">
<source src="desktop2.webm" type="video/webm" />
</video>
</body>
</html>

and a right click on a blank space in dolphin then create new and click on the HTML file will give you the basics and you just add lines from there.
all this assumes you have apache2 installed and started (thats it just installed and started no monkeying with configs) and the content in /var/www .

now I did monkey with my configs a little to have apache folow system links so EVERY thing dose not half to live in /var/www as my / partition is only 20-30 Gig and may fill up quick if I started putting a lot of stuff in /var/www


☢VINNY☢

[Detonate]

That seems straightforward. I don't have time to work on it now, but maybe I can get to it after tax season.

[james147]

now I did monkey with my configs a little to have apache folow system links so EVERY thing dose not half to live in /var/www as my / partition is only 20-30 Gig and may fill up quick if I started putting a lot of stuff in /var/www

I think a better method would be to bind mount the location you want to store the www file in to /var/www. That way you keep apache inside that directory rather then being able to access any file on your system (better to be safe then sorry later when it comes to exposing things to the internet).

[Goeroeboeroe]

If you're really interested in this stuff, I can recommend http://camendesign.com/code/video_for_everybody
It's a bit old but still one of the best tutorials, with a fallback for browsers not able to handle <video>, without the use of flash.