<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>cvramen.com &#187; web standards</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cvramen.com/?feed=rss2&#038;cat=41" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cvramen.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 01 Aug 2010 03:40:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>HTML: Good Times Await Us (Maybe)</title>
		<link>http://cvramen.com/?p=35</link>
		<comments>http://cvramen.com/?p=35#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Dec 2009 19:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>cvramen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[new technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[web standards]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cvramen.com/?p=35</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Looks like an update to HTML will be adopted soon.http://lifehacker.com/5416100/ Of course, as with any web standard or new internet-related technology, there&#8217;s no guarantee that any of this will be implemented. All this stuff is completely voluntary, and no one&#8217;s forcing anyone to adopt HTML 5. A group of people simply reccommend that certain things [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Looks like an update to HTML will be adopted soon.<br /><a href="http://lifehacker.com/5416100/">http://lifehacker.com/5416100/</a></p>
<p>Of course, as with any web standard or new internet-related technology, there&#8217;s no guarantee that any of this will be implemented. All this stuff is completely voluntary, and no one&#8217;s forcing anyone to adopt HTML 5. A group of people simply reccommend that certain things be used by webpage creators (or not used). We&#8217;ll have to cross our fingers and hope that the browsers won&#8217;t be too slow in implementing this.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s weird to think how long ago something as simple as this could have been implemented, but now, in 2009, we&#8217;re seeing it.&nbsp;One won&#8217;t have to invoke some universal,&nbsp;proprietary platform to view videos embedded in web pages. The era is almost over, in which ninety-something percent of videos play only with the blessing of Adobe.&nbsp;People will be embedding video into a&nbsp;web page without having to use any external systems Embedding video into html just using the html itself. Good stuff.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve always found it contemptible that every time a browser is installed on a new computer, the user has to go to a specific website&nbsp;(Adobe) to download a file&nbsp;in order to have the abiltiy to view video. Video is so common that this should not be necessary. Browsers should just be able to do basic things like&nbsp;open video&nbsp;without any additional work for the user.</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s just hope the browsers will adopt the video standard. Looks like the <a href="http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/07/decoding-the-html-5-video-codec-debate.ars">debate about how to do it</a> is still going on. Looks like intellectual property is once again working to screw us, preventing us from getting browsers that play video without plugins. And, big surprise, it&#8217;s Apple that&#8217;s fighting for the cause of&nbsp;intellectual property and standing in the way of progress.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://cvramen.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=35</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
