<a href="http://www.cnet.com/au/news/html5-is-done-but-two-groups-still-wrestle-over-webs-future/" rel="nofollow">http://www.cnet.com/au/news/html5-is-done-but-two-groups-sti...</a><p>""The real problem is of course that the W3C is still copying our work even after we asked them to stop doing that," [Anne] van Kesteren said. It's legal, but "oftentimes it comes pretty close [to] or is actual plagiarism."<p>It's one of many instances of copying, Hickson said. "For reasons that defy my understanding, the W3C staff refuse to treat the WHATWG as a peer organization" that relies on WHATWG's work, he said. Instead, it creates its own copies of some standards. "They'll eventually say they have a 'final' version, and then they'll stop fixing bugs. It's very sad."
The other huge accomplishment of HTML5 is completely standardizing many fundamental parts of the web that previously were a mess of browser incompatibilities. 6 years ago, if you wanted to parse HTML, you might reach for BeautifulSoup, or libxml, or Hpricot, or Nokogiri...and they would all be subtly different in the parse tree they produced. And they couldn't do any better, because if you viewed the page in IE, or Firefox, or Chrome, or Safari, you might get a different parse tree.<p>Now, IE9+, Firefox, Chrome, and Safari are all basically guaranteed to look at the same page in the same way, and the "toolsmith" parsers like Gumbo or html5lib are all rapidly converging on the standard. So it's finally possible to see a page the way a browser sees it.
This CNet article seems to have a lot more detail than the Techcrunch one:<p><a href="http://www.cnet.com/news/html5-is-done-but-two-groups-still-wrestle-over-webs-future/#ftag=CAD590a51e" rel="nofollow">http://www.cnet.com/news/html5-is-done-but-two-groups-still-...</a>
Cool, but It doesn't really matter what W3C says. In the end it is all about what the Oligarchy of popular browser implementers decide to implement.
Final standards document<p><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-html5-20141028/" rel="nofollow">http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-html5-20141028/</a>
I'm hoping for a scene graph standard for HTML6 and a spec that allows multiple documents per window (which themselves could be nodes on a scene graph) instead of the one document per window.
Does anyone know how is Doctype versioning going to work with W3Cs snapshoting of the living standard? Or are browsers just going to ignore W3C and stick to implementing WHATWGs spec?
I was hoping they would add file api support for downloading to non sand boxed environment with mandatory user interaction prompts. The api would prompt for the file download location (via file dialog) but after that, how the file is filled up is up to the web client (and happens in the background). This would allow for parallel download workers via the existing get range option.
<a href="http://html5doctor.com/the-ride-to-5/" rel="nofollow">http://html5doctor.com/the-ride-to-5/</a> is an interesting overview of perspectives of various people who've been around HTML5 for years about its publication as a REC.