IDT Partners

  • history YouTube
  • YouTube Premium
  • Social impact YouTube
  • about 
  • solutions 
  • careers 
  • HTML5

    HTML 5 is the fifth and current major version of the HTML standard, and subsumes XHTML. It currently exists in two standardized forms: HTML 5.2 Recommendation by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C, a broad coalition of organizations), intended primarily for Web content developers; and HTML Living Standard by WHATWG (a small consortium of four browser vendors), intended primarily for browser developers, though it also exists in an abridged Web developer version. There are minor conflicts between the two groups' specifications.

    On 14 February 2011, the W3C extended the charter of its HTML Working Group with clear milestones for HTML 5. In May 2011, the working group advanced HTML 5 to "Last Call", an invitation to communities inside and outside W3C to confirm the technical soundness of the specification. The W3C developed a comprehensive test suite to achieve broad interoperability for the full specification by 2014, which was the target date for recommendation. In January 2011, the WHATWG renamed its "HTML5" specification HTML Living Standard. The W3C nevertheless continued its project to release HTML 5.

    After the standardization of the HTML 5 specification in October 2014, the core vocabulary and features are being extended in four ways. Likewise, some features that were removed from the original HTML 5 specification have been standardized separately as modules, such as Microdata and Canvas. Technical specifications introduced as HTML 5 extensions such as Polyglot Markup have also been standardized as modules. Some W3C specifications that were originally separate specifications have been adapted as HTML 5 extensions or features, such as SVG. Some features that might have slowed down the standardization of HTML 5 will be standardized as upcoming specifications, instead. HTML 5.1 is expected to be finalized in 2016, and it is currently on the standardization track at the W3C.

    The HTML 5 syntax is no longer based on SGML despite the similarity of its markup. It has, however, been designed to be backward-compatible with common parsing of older versions of HTML. It comes with a new introductory line that looks like an SGML document type declaration, , which triggers the standards-compliant rendering mode. Since 5 January 2009, HTML 5 also includes Web Forms 2.0, a previously separate WHATWG specification.

    HTML 5 is designed so that old browsers can safely ignore new HTML 5 constructs. In contrast to HTML 4.01, the HTML 5 specification gives detailed rules for lexing and parsing, with the intent that compliant browsers will produce the same results when parsing incorrect syntax. Although HTML 5 now defines a consistent behavior for "tag soup" documents, those documents are not regarded as conforming to the HTML 5 standard.

    When initially presenting it to the public, the W3C announced the HTML 5 logo as a "general-purpose visual identity for a broad set of open web technologies, including HTML 5, CSS, SVG, WOFF, and others". Some web standard advocates, including The Web Standards Project, criticized that definition of "HTML5" as an umbrella term, pointing out the blurring of terminology and the potential for miscommunication. Three days later, the W3C responded to community feedback and changed the logo's definition, dropping the enumeration of related technologies. The W3C then said the logo "represents HTML5, the cornerstone for modern Web applications".

    The initial enablers for DRM in HTML 5 were Google and Microsoft. Supporters also include Adobe. On 14 May 2014, Mozilla announced plans to support EME in Firefox, the last major browser to avoid DRM. Calling it "a difficult and uncomfortable step", Andreas Gal of Mozilla explained that future versions of Firefox would remain open source but ship with a sandbox designed to run a content decryption module developed by Adobe. While promising to "work on alternative solutions", Mozilla's Executive Chair Mitchell Baker stated that a refusal to implement EME would have accomplished little more than convincing many users to switch browsers. This decision was condemned by Cory Doctorow and the Free Software Foundation.