I just released the notes of my “Using HTML5 sensibly” talk over on the Mozilla hacks blog and there are a few questions that need answering by anyone who wants to be part of publishing on the web in the future:

• Can innovation be based on “people never did this correctly anyways”?
• Is it HTML or BML? (HyperText Markup Language or Browser Markup Language)
• Should HTML be there only for browsers? What about conversion Services? Search bots? Content scrapers?
• Should we shoe-horn new technology into legacy browsers?
• Do patches add complexity as we need to test their performance? (there is no point in giving an old browser functionality that simply looks bad or grinds it down to a halt)
• How about moving IE fixes to the server side? Padding with DIVs with classes in PHP/Ruby/Python after checking the browser and no JS for IE?
• Can we expect content creators to create video in many formats to support an open technology?
• Can a service like vid.ly be trusted for content creation and storage?
• Is HTML5 not applicable for premium content?

Check the detailed notes on the Mozilla blog, and – as a reminder – here are the slides and the video of the talk:

You can get the slides on Slideshare or see them here:

You can see “Using HTML5 sensibly” on any HTML5 enabled device here (courtesy of vid.ly).

Yesterday night I spoke at the London Ajax Meetup about Multimedia on the web (a repeat of my MIT talk as I wanted a video of it) and “Using HTML5” sensibly.

Especially the second talk was close to my heart as I think it is high time us developers take back HTML5 from the marketing people. HTML5 is the evolution of our web technologies, not another flashy add-on to already badly used outdated practices.

You can find the Slides of the talk on Slideshare:

The audio recording of the talk is also available on archive.org.

The organisers promised that the video of the talks is available soon.

I am also going to write a detailed post on Mozilla once the video is available.

As just announced – the Google IO conference registration is open and they have created a very cool countdown animation:

In the blog post they describe the cool countdown as HTML5:

If you liked our HTML5 countdown, stay tuned for more surprises. We’ll keep you posted on the latest developments for Google I/O 2011 at the website, on Twitter (@Googleio) and Google Buzz. Get your tickets early—last year we sold out in record time!

Whilst awesome, there is not much new HTML in there right now. This time there is no need for beauitfying – the code is not at all minified or packed and includes comments – which I love, thanks guys! Seems most of the work was done by Matt King and the balls use the box2D physics engine.

Strangely enough, however it does not use the CANVAS tag for the animation (as box2d does), but instead creates images which get moved around. I guess this is a performance issue, but seeing that this MBA has its fan running after half a minute of the countdown it didn’t help too much.

There is also no sign of any of the new semantic HTML elements in the source – instead of header, section and footer there are DIVs with IDs. There’s a NOSCRIPT element telling people to go to whatbrowser.org to download a better browser and a screenshot of the animation if it doesn’t work for you. This is a good way of getting people excited but I don’t know why you would need a NOSCRIPT when you generate all the images of the balls anyways. Just replace this message when the page loads.

Just setting the record straight here, thanks for keeping the source open, Google!

For years our clients have been confused about the elusive fold on the web. We all * know * that content should be above it but designers always squirm when we ask them about it.

Time to make it easy for designers to show their clients where the fold is. For this, I wrote a bookmarklet:

Just by showing people you can stop a lot of fruitless discussions.

(might contain irony)

I am very disappointed with a post released today by Serge Jespers, Adobe Evangelist entitled Stealing content was never easier than with HTML5.

I am mostly disappointed by the headline which I hope is there for link-baiting and Google juice. In other words, really cheap and lame propaganda.

The post has a good intention: there is a problem with open media standards in HTML5 that there is no way to protect premium content from being downloaded. There is no DRM, there is no encryption or watermarking. If we want premium content publishers on the bandwagon, then we need to think about that. Posts like this with this headline make it hard for us to even reach people to talk about the options. It is FUD and Adobe as a company that claims to support HTML5 should know better.

Right now, I do tell people who are paranoid about their content to use Flash as it has a certain degree of protection against simple downloading. If Adobe’s official spokespeople keep spouting messages like this, I will move to tell them to use Silverlight.

The argument that it is easy to download video in HTML5 as you can see it in the source is like saying that it is easy to steal newspapers in train stations as they are easy to reach. It is invalid – that you can steal it is not the issue here, the issue is what you do with the paper. Do you take it from the stand and go and pay it without looking at it? Do you read it on the spot and then put it back? Do you leave with it without paying? Or do you check the headlines and when you are intrigued you go and pay for it? Do you take the paper, go to a copier, copy it and then try to sell the copies? Fact is – it is dead easy to get the paper, the same way it is dead easy to get a video online.

I find myself many a time downloading YouTube videos as I am on the go a lot. Being on the go (and considering data plans and roaming) means I have no connection, or I have a flaky connection that downloads the movie to minute 3 and then stalls while the fan of my laptop spins. Instead, at home when I got my fat connection I download some talks and screencasts and watch them offline using VLC. Then I delete them – or I blog about them first linking to YouTube and advertise them that way.

To download these extremely well protected Flash movies I use one of the dozens of services, browser extensions or apps out there.

Allowing people to download a movie means you get a bigger audience. If you make people jump through hoops to watch a movie or make them watch a 5 minute ad for a 10 second film you shouldn’t be surprised if they use P2P filesharing or Hotfile, Rapidshare, Fileserve, Megaupload and dozens of other services to download the movie in 10 seconds and then watch it at their leisure.

Recognise something? The mere fact that there are thousands of downloaders for YouTube and paid for hosting services that offer easy to download pirated copies means that there is a demand for that feature. A feature that would make me damn happy to have on YouTube and I would pay for it.

So instead of demonising HTML5 as the backdoor that will allow evil doers to steal your goodies maybe it is time for premium content providers to open up to the needs of web users, and find a way to publish previews of content and the full content for subscribed users. There are ways to make money and share your products – but not if you spend most of your time and money on things that seemingly give you protection but in reality are just a glass shield.