Why HTML5 instead of flash?

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View

*Flash* is the platform of the multimedia and through the flash you can
give different effects and animations to your designs. But the
disadvantage of the flash is that for running the flash you need to
install the flash player in your browser.

On the other hand today *HTML5* is the best tool for creating the
website as well as for giving the different effects and there is no any
external tool is required for running the HTML5 file. HTML5 is supported
by most of the modern browsers and any there is no any need of external
plug-ins for the application and mostly in the mobile applications HTML5
is used.


'Web Design New York' (http://www.spinxwebdesignnewyork.com ) 'Web Design
NYC' (http://www.spinxwebdesignnewyork.com/web-design-new-york.html )
Delois's Profile: http://www.httppoint.com/member.php?userid=17043
View this thread: http://www.httppoint.com/showthread.php?t=57402

Message Posted via the webmaster forum http://www.httppoint.com , (Ad revenue

Re: Why HTML5 instead of flash?

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Just curious (because it is not the first time I hear of HTML5): what is
HTML5 all about? New CSS with more advanced effects or what else?

What does HTML5 have more than HTML4?

Alfred Molon
http://www.molon.de - Photos of Asia, Africa and Europe

Re: Why HTML5 instead of flash?

Quoted text here. Click to load it



"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

Re: Why HTML5 instead of flash?

Streater says...
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Thanks. What percentage of users have browsers capable of displaying
HTML5 elements properly?

Alfred Molon
http://www.molon.de - Photos of Asia, Africa and Europe

Re: Why HTML5 instead of flash?

Quoted text here. Click to load it

First, html5 is rapidly changing, and you must be very careful if you
use it to be sure what you use is supported on most fairly recent
browsers, if you write pages for the general public. Second, html5 in
one respect a step backward from xhtml 1.1, in that it is not designed
to work and parse correctly for xml, while xhtml is designed to work
for html, xml, or a combination of both. However, according to the
w3c, one can write xhtml5 that works and parses properly for html and
xml content, and I have used this with little trouble.

Flash is well established and is installed on most modern computers.
The newer versions of flash will support low resolution ad animations
etc as well as up to Blu-ray quality HD movies of feature length. The
built in "house" video players of html5 are still rather basic, and
what is worse you have to use at least 3 types of videos to view on
most current browsers. Of course browser makers could not agree on a
single video house format for all new browsers.

Quite a bit of fuss has been made about new graphics creation features
of html5, but much of this is not yet supported by many browsers. I
see no great need for this, because a server side graphics extension
of php has been used for years for graphics and is well understood.
The advantage is that php, being on the server, downloads the finished
graphics to the computer and there is no concern about which browsers
support which features of html5 graphics code.
It should be noted that html5, and even xhtml5, will support flash and
several other players that are, or may be, installed on the computer
if you pay attention to using the correct valid html5 code.

Also the w3c validator still supports xhtml and html code back to
html2. It is perfectly correct to write a web page in even html2 if
that meets your needs. Also most modern browsers support the earlier
versions of html.

Some of the strict versions of html and xhtml do not allow several
things, such as Java applets. However there is a way to handle this.
According to the w3c it is quite possible to embed one or more web
pages in the main page, and the embedded page need not be of the same
html version (Doctype) as the main page. Thus you could select html4
transitional for a page that uses a Java applet. This could then be
embedded in a main xhtml1.1 page, for example, that does not allow a
Java applet. However one must not use the old Netscape embed tag which
never was valid html or xhtml up through xhtml 1.1. There is a well
know object method that will validate and work on most browsers.
However it does not work on many IE browsers. However there is a
special IE ActiveX object that will work on IE browsers. and one uses
IE conditional comments to route to the standard object for non-IE or
ActiveX object for IE browsers. In truth many browsers will let
several invalid codes, for the Doctype selected, work anyway.

Site Timeline