[Superfly_FR]

HTML5 Definition Complete, W3C Moves to Interoperability Testing and Performance

17 December 2012 — The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) published today the complete definition of the HTML5 and Canvas 2D specifications. Though not yet W3C standards, these specifications are now feature complete, meaning businesses and developers have a stable target for implementation and planning. HTML5 is the cornerstone of the Open Web Platform, a full programming environment for cross-platform applications with access to device capabilities; video and animations; graphics; style, typography, and other tools for digital publishing; extensive network capabilities; and more.

That's somehow History ...

Full here : W3C (add #RIM at the end to see RIM's comment about this announcement or scroll the page down)

[TheStoof]

If only their stupid Ripple worked on Mac OS X Chrome. Oh, and HTML5 GUIs are ugly if you're crap at GUIs to start with. In fact, QML incorporates JS, which is basically HTML5 anyway. Soooo .

[Superfly_FR]

If only their stupid Ripple worked on Mac OS X Chrome. Oh, and HTML5 GUIs are ugly if you're crap at GUIs to start with. In fact, QML incorporates JS, which is basically HTML5 anyway. Soooo .

Dev Alpha simulator for Mac : https://developer.blackberry.com/htm...c#blackberry10 and for the UI, have you checked the BBui.js toolkit ?
Quite easy to use and a real performance booster, due to nice DOM handling. https://github.com/blackberry/bbUI.js

Also the Qt track is fine

[TheStoof]

Dev Alpha simulator for Mac : https://developer.blackberry.com/htm...c#blackberry10

Also the Qt track is fine

Si. I'm going on vacation, so I hope to play around more with QML and my Macbook Air. The simulator works great, too.

[notfanboy]

Hazardous standard ? HTML5 ?? really ??? well ... not anymore !

I have never heard anyone refer to HTML5 as a "hazardous" standard (or any of its synonyms like "risky") before. Not even remotely.
Can you cite when such an assertion was made, and by whom?

[Superfly_FR]

I have never heard anyone refer to HTML5 as a "hazardous" standard (or any of its synonyms like "risky") before. Not even remotely.
Can you cite when such an assertion was made, and by whom?

Well replace it by "never ending specifications" or "non-standard standard" and you'll find tons of posts alike in HTML5 forums/blogs.
But I may miss-interpret the sense of hazardous (uncertain, unclear, doubtful) ... if it's the case ...

[kbz1960]

Well replace it by "never ending specifications" or "non-standard standard" and you'll find tons of posts alike in HTML5 forums/blogs.
But I may miss-interpret the sense of hazardous (uncertain, unclear, doubtful) ... if it's the case ...

Yes it's that spanish cow English of yours

Those of us that have been around awhile know what you mean

[Superfly_FR]

Yes it's that spanish cow English of yours
Those of us that have been around awhile know what you mean

Thanks Moooooooo

[kbz1960]

Thanks Moooooooo

Although you look like a French sheep

Thanks for the link.