Status

()

Core
DOM: Core & HTML
REOPENED
7 years ago
2 months ago

People

(Reporter: blizzard, Unassigned)

Tracking

(Depends on: 10 bugs, Blocks: 1 bug, {meta})

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

(URL)

Attachments

(1 attachment, 1 obsolete attachment)

142 bytes, patch
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
(Reporter)

Description

7 years ago
Firefox already has the best HTML5 support on the planet.  Let's go finish it.
(Reporter)

Updated

7 years ago
Depends on: 487949
(Reporter)

Updated

7 years ago
Depends on: 566348
No longer depends on: 487949
OS: Windows 7 → All
Hardware: x86 → All
(Reporter)

Updated

7 years ago
Depends on: 487949
OS: All → Windows 7
Hardware: All → x86
(Reporter)

Updated

7 years ago
OS: Windows 7 → All
Hardware: x86 → All
Isn't this what the html5 keyword is for?
I'm not sure you can "finish" something that's constantly getting features added....
Component: General → Tracking
QA Contact: general → chofmann

Comment 3

7 years ago
(In reply to comment #2)
> I'm not sure you can "finish" something that's constantly getting features
> added....

There will probably be a feature freeze in 2012 when it comes to HTML5. As new features are added to the spec, they will be added as dependencies of this bug.
(Reporter)

Comment 4

7 years ago
This is a tracking bug, please respect it as such.

Updated

7 years ago

Comment 5

7 years ago
Maybe bug 92264 should block this one?
(Reporter)

Updated

7 years ago
Depends on: 591737
Depends on: 33339
Depends on: 508725

Comment 6

7 years ago
Bug #498253 is html5, but maybe there's another html5 audio/video tracking bug?

Updated

7 years ago
Depends on: 560112

Updated

7 years ago
Depends on: 414064

Updated

7 years ago
Depends on: 344614

Updated

7 years ago
Depends on: 591467

Updated

7 years ago
Keywords: meta

Updated

7 years ago
Depends on: 617528

Updated

7 years ago
Depends on: 617532
This should depend on bug 341604 as well.

Updated

6 years ago
Depends on: 341604

Comment 8

6 years ago
Created attachment 533159 [details]
giga.filezilla.

giga.ste de gilma gamez con filezilla y otras yerbas

Comment 9

6 years ago
Created attachment 533321 [details] [diff] [review]
plataforma trabajo alumna uned

espero no meter la pata  con el 533159: giga.filezill
Attachment #533159 - Attachment is obsolete: true

Comment 10

6 years ago
This should also depend on Bug 629350

Updated

6 years ago
Depends on: 629350

Updated

6 years ago
Depends on: 613149

Comment 11

6 years ago
I am really disappointed when I read things like "Firefox already has the best HTML5 support on the planet".
For example, for months and even years, for the end user, Firefox claims best HTML5 support and just displays a text input for the input type=range, the input type=number, the input type=date, the input type=color, ...
Hey guys, open your eyes, look at other browsers (eg:chromium): Firefox is a great browser but is lagging behind on HTML5 support.
sfornengo@gmail.com, our support for form controls is generally very _diferent_ from chromium's: we don't support all the types yet, but the ones we do support we support fully instead of half-assed broken implementations which seems to be the chromium approach.

Of course if one does just a cursory glance instead of actually testing the behavior of the inputs chromium's approach seems to have "better support".

Comment 13

6 years ago
yeah, that's the problem !
for millions and millions of ordinary users, Firefox just seems to have "poor support" of HTML5 form controls and loses its image although I want to believe that behind the scene it roxx.
(In reply to sfornengo from comment #13)
> yeah, that's the problem !
> for millions and millions of ordinary users, Firefox just seems to have
> "poor support" of HTML5 form controls and loses its image although I want to
> believe that behind the scene it roxx.

First of all, I believe this kind of discussion isn't appropriate in a bug. If you want to have a positive discussion, you should try to go to our mailing-lists/newsgroups [1]. For example, mozilla.wishlist or if you would like to understand why and how to help, mozilla.dev.platform or mozilla.dev.tech.dom.

This said, I think you can't assume users believe we have poor HTML5 Forms controls support based on the fact some input types are not yet implemented. First, they have no idea what HTML5 Forms is. In addition, even if we had a full HTML5 Forms support, they wouldn't see the difference because it's rarely used (even features widely implemented by UAs). To notice we don't support those types you must be a web developer.

If you want to discuss this further, please use a more appropriate communication channel.

[1] https://www.mozilla.org/about/forums/

Updated

5 years ago
No longer depends on: 591467

Updated

5 years ago
Depends on: 746087

Updated

5 years ago
Depends on: 485377

Updated

5 years ago
Depends on: 670898

Updated

5 years ago
Depends on: 601912

Updated

5 years ago
Depends on: 629801

Updated

5 years ago
Depends on: 723008
Depends on: 613154

Updated

5 years ago
Depends on: 802157
Depends on: 802895

Updated

5 years ago
Depends on: 813034
Blocks: 813450
Depends on: 820508

Updated

4 years ago
Depends on: 840640

Updated

4 years ago
Depends on: 833385
Depends on: 847376
Depends on: 827160
Depends on: 678460
Depends on: 872098

Comment 15

4 years ago
HTML 5.1 is in W3C Working Draft 28 May 2013

http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-html51-20130528/

Don't know whether the keyword HTML5 should be replaced with HTML5.1 

=> (html5.1) Finish HTML5.1
This bug hasn't served a purpose for quite a while.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 4 years ago
Resolution: --- → INVALID

Comment 17

4 years ago
Ms2ger - it's served the same purpose it always has, as a tracking bug for everything in HTML5. 

HTML5 is now a CR (URL added) so it is unlikely that any new features will go into it (they'll likely go into HTML5.1 instead), thus this bug is now particularly helpful as it's something that's realistically finishable.

Being able to state that Firefox has a complete implementation of HTML5 is useful for our own documentation (DevMo), marketing, evangelism, and 3rd party web authors/designers/developers, book authors etc.

xunxun - no the keyword HTML should not be replaced with HTML5.1. If you want to open a separate Finish HTML5.1 tracking bug please go ahead and add specifics to it that are in 5.1 beyond 5.0.
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: INVALID → ---

Comment 18

4 years ago
Here's the priority of the things that should be implemented :
P1 :
- html 5 forms including related CSS (as a web developer, I hate using polyfills for those)
- html 5 dropzone attr.
- Seamless Iframes

P2 :
- Shared Workers
- Video subtitle support

That's just what's missing in Firefox to support all HTML 5. Chrome has the harder stuff left, while Firefox has the easy stuff left.
Depends on: 1009935

Updated

3 years ago
Depends on: 1099871
HTML5 is a REC.
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 4 years ago3 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
(In reply to :Ms2ger from comment #19)
> HTML5 is a REC.

This is a Mozilla implementation bug, not a W3C process bug. ;)

Comment 21

3 years ago
>This is a Mozilla implementation bug
Indeed.
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: FIXED → ---

Updated

3 years ago
Depends on: 1095549

Updated

2 years ago
Depends on: 1206845

Updated

a year ago
Blocks: 1267036
Component: Tracking → DOM: Core & HTML
QA Contact: chofmann

Comment 22

10 months ago
depends on Bug 1245021

Updated

10 months ago
Depends on: 1294957

Comment 23

10 months ago
(In reply to Tantek Çelik from comment #17)
> Ms2ger - it's served the same purpose it always has, as a tracking bug for
> everything in HTML5. 
> 
> HTML5 is now a CR (URL added) so it is unlikely that any new features will
> go into it (they'll likely go into HTML5.1 instead), thus this bug is now
> particularly helpful as it's something that's realistically finishable.

I think that at this point it's clear to everyone interested enough in the matter that versioning on the web is a failure. "Authors" deal with the browsers that are actually released, not the things described in the snapshot W3C specs.
And specs still catch up with reality rather than the other way around. A very recent instance of this: https://github.com/w3c/webcomponents/issues/544

The human organization model around specs that work on the web is living documents, because that's the only way to make the spec the closest to what authors should care about. This is not the model the W3C chooses.


> Being able to state that Firefox has a complete implementation of HTML5 is
> useful for our own documentation (DevMo), marketing, evangelism, and 3rd
> party web authors/designers/developers, book authors etc.

https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/ is now almost 2 years old. This means that it contains elements which are known to be wrong and have been since fixed in https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/ and browsers.
Not only Firefox implementing https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/ will not happen because of spec bugs (so this goal is not "finishable" by any honest meaning of the term), but Mozilla stating Firefox has a "complete implementation of HTML5" would be probably hurtful to some degree. 

The marketing around "HTML5" has done its course. Long live Progressive Web Applications!

This bug should probably be closed because it's misleading.

Comment 24

10 months ago
thats true
but we should keep one tracking bug to just make it easy for users and developers to keep an eye on what is going on

if this bug willl be closed we should transfer the bugs here to the new tracking bug

like bug #802882 which already exists
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.