True, but the vast majority of the websites we work on have a life of less than 12 months, often much less - rebuilding annually or more often is the norm. My inclination is to wait and see what level of AT support develops before putting significant effort into using HTML5.
Of course it's different if you're building websites that will be around for years. Steve -----Original Message----- From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org] On Behalf Of David Dorward Sent: 25 January 2011 09:52 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] HTML5 v. HTML 4.x On 25 Jan 2011, at 08:34, Steve Green wrote: > You can use it, but will anyone benefit from it? Assistive technologies don't support much, if any, of the new semantics. I don't know if search engines and other users of programmatic access to websites are currently able to make use of HTML5 markup, but I have not seen anything to indicate that they do. So what exactly is the benefit? It saves having to rewrite the site when AT, SEs, etc do have significant support for them. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ******************************************************************* ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *******************************************************************
