Do you know how accurate this article is, technically and otherwise?
I wonder how much of this article is actually just bashing or has merit as Apple trying to push something "open" with clear self-interest thinly veiled?
I wonder how much of this article is actually just bashing or has merit as Apple trying to push something "open" with clear self-interest thinly veiled?
* Made an official spec for a CSS3 addition, labeled CSS Animation.
* Submitted the spec to be included in the overall HTML5/CSS3 document.
* Wrote a reference renderer in Webkit that properly uses a vendor tag for non-standard CSS elements (as per the CSS spec).
* Open-sourced it in Webkit.
I don't know how more "open" you can get with Apple's HTML5. Somebody has to create the bleeding edge in order to get there. How do you think CSS3 supports the features that it does now like border-radius or RGBA? Somebody made it and submitted it.
Just because Apple forces you download Safari for (presently) Safari only demos doesn't mean it's any less open. I know that Firefox is slowing working towards adding all the cool features. For example, the 3.7 alpha supports CSS transitions (the precursor to animations).
Yes it does. Those demos partially worked in Chrome and Opera yet they did not allow those browsers. The should have allowed you to view them in other browsers and stated that safari is the only one to 100% properly display them. Although they also should have included the -moz and -o prefixes. Till then its not open. Its a closed implementation.
That's not how the rules of Internet Land work, friend.
And interoperability is only one goal of HTML5. The other goal, in my opinion, is shiny features like Canvas, CSS Animation, and 3D Transforms. And Apple is doing quite well at those.