(R)evolution Number 5
July 2nd, 2009
Cross-posted from hacks.mozilla.org
We’ve just launched Firefox 3.5, and we’re incredibly proud. Naturally, we have engaged in plentiful Mozilla advocacy — this site is, amongst other things, a vehicle for showcasing the latest browser’s new capabilities. We like to think about this release as an upgrade for the whole World Wide Web, because of the new developer-facing features that have just been introduced into the web platform. When talking about some of the next generation standards, the appearance of the number “5″ is almost uncanny — consider HTML5 and ECMAScript 5 (PDF). The recent (and very welcome) hype around HTML5 in the press is what motivates this article. Let’s take a step back, and consider some of Mozilla’s web advocacy in the context of events leading up to the release of Firefox 3.5.
Standardization of many of these features often came after much spirited discussion, and we’re pleased to see the prominent placement of HTML5 as a key strategic initiative by major web development companies. Indeed, exciting new web applications hold a great deal of promise, and really showcase what the future of the web platform holds in store for aspiring developers. Many herald the triumphant arrival of the browser as the computer, an old theme that gets bolstered with the arrival of attractive HTML5 platform features that are implemented across Safari, Chrome, Opera, and of course, Firefox (with IE8 getting an honorable mention for having both some HTML5 features and some ECMAScript, 5th Edition features).
Call it what you will — Web 5.0, Open Web 5th Generation (wince!), or, (R)evolution # 5, the future is now. But lest anyone forget, HTML5 is not a completed standard yet, as the W3C was quick to point out. The editor doesn’t anticipate completion till 2010. The path taken from the start of what is now called HTML5 to the present-day era of (very welcome) hype has been a long one, and Mozilla has been part of the journey from the very beginning.
For one thing, we were there to point out, in no uncertain terms, that the W3C had perhaps lost its way. Exactly 5 summers ago (again, with that magic number!), it became evident that the W3C was no longer able to serve as sole custodian of the standards governing the open web of browser-based applications, so Mozilla, along with Opera, started the WHATWG. Of course, back then, we didn’t call it HTML5, and while Firefox itself made a splash in 2004, the steps taken towards standardization were definitive but tentative. Soon, other browser vendors joined us, and by the time the reconciliation with W3C occurred two years later, the innovations introduced into the web platform via the movement initiated by Mozilla had gained substantial momentum.
The net result is a specification that is not yet complete called “HTML5″ which is implemented piecemeal by most modern browsers. The features we choose to implement as an industry are in response to developers, and our modus operandi is (for the most part) in the open. Mozilla funds the HTML5 Validator, producing the first real HTML5 parser, which now drives W3C’s markup validation for HTML5. That parser has made its way back into Firefox. It’s important to note that capabilities that are of greatest interest (many of which are showcased on this blog) are not only developed within the HTML5 specification, but also as part of the W3C Geolocation WG, the Web Apps WG, and the CSS WG.
The release of Firefox 3.5, along with updates to other modern browsers, seems to declare that HTML5 has arrived. But with the foresight that comes with having been around this for a while, we also know that we have a lot of work ahead of us. For one thing, we’ve got to finish HTML5, or at least publish a subset of it that we all agree is ready for implementation, soon. We’ve also got to ensure that accessibility serves as an important design principle in the emerging web platform, and resolve sticky differences here. Also, an open standard does not an open platform make, as debates about web fonts and audio/video codecs show. We’ve got a lot of work ahead of us, but for now, 5 years after the summer we started the ball rolling, we’re enjoying the hype around (R)evolution Number 5.
July 30th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
Firefox 3.5 is so good I really feel it should have been called Firefox 4. The ragged version numbers are not end-user friendly and people think they’re only getting bugfixes, even with a .5 version. The typography is gorgeous, at least in the Mac version, I haven’t seen the others yet. The speed is great. The cross-platform support is awesome. HTML 5 is essential, we are going to see some great stuff over the next few years.
On the ISO MPEG-4 H.264/AAC issue, though, Mozilla is 180 degrees wrong. I wish I could think of some way to say even more wrong than 180 degrees. Like embarrassingly wrong. What you’re saying may make sense to other software developers, but to audio video producers or tool or player manufacturers you sound like raving crazy people. You say you have a licensing issue, and you propose that the solution is not for you to work around it, but instead the world should obsolete 99% of the Web’s audio video including YouTube and iTunes and also obsolete every single audio video device made since the first iPod, including Blu-Ray, and also obsolete all of the digital media creation tools made during the 21st century. And the best part is that we are to use vaporware Ogg replacements.
What makes it even worse is the offensive idea that Web standardization trumps existing audio video standardization. But what makes that even worse is that Web standardization has always failed, and audio video standardization has always succeeded. For almost 20 years anyone has been able to make MPEG or CD or DVD media or players, but on the Web we are all making IE 6 apps up until just recently and always hoping for better. I hope HTML 5 is finally the standardized Web, but think about the hubris involved when Mozilla tells the world it has been using the wrong audio video format for the last 10 years and we need to re-encode everything so we can see it in Firefox. It is embarrassing.