[FONT=“Georgia”]No no, zcorpan is right.
It’s suggested mark-up, but you don’t have to use it. It’s only a suggestion.
Same goes for all the [h1] and [h2] suggestions. You can use whatever you like for those too.
[/FONT]
Oh OK then 
Thanks for the clarification
I’ve been called on allowing HTML5Shiv, and it’s now re-considered if we want to allow it. I’ll get back here when I know more.
Terribly sorry for the confusion 
Edit:
Rectification: after a debate it is decided that HTML5 Shiv will not be allowed.
The judges will take into consideration that HTML5 rendering may be problematic on IE6.
We’re on the same page if you believe that users of less capable browsers needn’t see exactly the same websites as those that can enjoy more modern enhancements, yes.
I don’t understand, personally. What does it achieve? I can’t think of a real world example where you would ever be limited to no js or text only. I don’t agree on the HTML5Shiv being a ‘kludge or fudge,’ it’s a tiny script that allows users of an old browser the ability to view styled, semantic elements.
What things are you talking about that don’t work for almost half the web’s user base?
So am I because I’ve already spent a day adding them to everything 
(Of course I’m only allowed to enter for fun anyway.)
Yes, CSS gradients are allowed.
Rectification: after a debate it is decided that HTML5 Shiv will not be allowed.
The judges will take into consideration that HTML5 rendering may be problematic on IE6.
This is still a terrible idea. It’s a real shame. This contest could have had some amazing entries before this rule was put in place.
Also, you might as well say the current standard of HTML is simply not allowed at all. It’s not just that it doesn’t “play nice” with IE6 - it flat out doesn’t work (nor does it in IE8, I might add). If I were running this contest, I don’t think I would have IE incorporated at all to be honest.
We’re sorry you feel this way, but you have to remember this is a challenge, and no matter how you look at it, IE is a part of the real world, and as such MUST be accomodated for.
Whether you choose to create your page so it accomodates IE is entirely up to you. But the judges have set the rules and they will score accordingly. If they say graceful degradation is a rule, then so be it.
I’m interested in seeing how this all places out. I like the tight restrictions. It’s like the 1K challenges - it’s amazing what people can do with those, so these should be just as interesting…
As I’m sure you know, HTML 5 is not a ‘current standard’ of HTML by any means, it is a draft at the moment.
You might well have not incorporated IE into your own contest - but earlier you were complaining that the competition doesn’t reflect a real situation… well neither does discounting IE altogether!
I think seeing what can be done given certain restrictions and rules is far more interesting than allowing a totally free reign. The idea is to see what people can do with restrictions.
I don’t think I said “HTML5” anywhere. I was quite literally referring to the current standard of HTML: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/
I don’t see “draft” anywhere on there. I do see “standard” however. Anyway, that’s a whole different story. My point still stands.
When was I complaining that the contest didn’t reflect a real situation? Please provide a quote - it should be easy since I’ve only made one other post in this thread. Here, I’ll do it for you:
IE8 should be used to test graceful degradation, as it is a terrible browser that is light years behind even the only somewhat-modern browsers. By comparison, IE6 is grotesquely inferior in ways words cannot express. No web site/page/design should ever be judged by how it looks or behaves in IE6 for any reason.
Fair enough, I was obviously thinking of someone else in a previous post then.
The outcome is still the same: The contest is the contest, and it has rules. If you don’t like the rules, or would have done it differently, that’s OK - you don’t have to enter. A lot of work has gone into coming up with this competition and the organisers are trying to be as fair as possible, and I think it’s a great competition which I will certainly be having a crack at later. You can as well if you like, or not, it’s up to you!
I think the restrictions are what makes this interesting as otherwise it would be just a “design the best site you can” type of competition - which is fine if that was what the rules were but would be a different kind of test.
Obviously this competition won’t please everybody as we all have strengths in certain areas and would rather something else was allowed/disallowed but the idea is to overcome these difficulties and still produce something worthwhile.
Regarding IE6 then I just assumed that the site had to work and be usable and look a little bit like the others. (It’s a shame that perhaps an iphone should have been added at the end of the list of browsers supported to make things really awkward. :))
I concur.
You contradict yourself, or have at least got yourself in a muddle. You say IE is a part of the real world and as such must be accommodated. On that I couldn’t agree more with you. However, in contrast to this, you then say that an HTML5Shiv is not allowed, despite this being the way that you accommodate IE outside the realms of this competition. HTML5 is part of the real, every day working world, why would you not want to accommodate that?
Also, please don’t compare this to the 1k challenges, those encourage creative freedom whereas this only serves to restrict it and implies that not using standard technologies such as HTML5 and Javascript is the right thing to do.
HTML5 is an evolving draft specification. This does not mean it should not be used. If everyone worked in this way the web would not evolve at all; the W3C Working Groups do not define standards BEFORE browser vendors implement them, it works the other way around.
I certainly am not saying disregard IE, there’s no reason to. What I am saying, and this is what I believe most professionals would agree with, is that (like in the real world) the Shiv should be permitted to allow HTML5 and modern CSS to be useful across as many browsers as possible.
It’s your competition, granted, but it only serves to promote backward values and you don’t seem to have your facts straight either.
EDIT: I thought I’d also provide some clarification as to what Ijj was saying earlier and the difference between HTML/HTML5. The WHATWG recently announced that they’d no longer refer to HTML5, but simply to HTML as it is an evolving/‘living’ standard. I use the term HTML5 to make it clear that I’m referring to recent additions to the HTML spec including, amongst others, semantic elements such as article, header, aside and so on.
Personally I think it’s a cool competition. Once I decided to just go by the originally stated contest rules in post 1 and 2 and ignore the confusions that happened after that (or learned to stop worrying and love the bomb), I’m having fun with it. HTML and CSS were arguably the coding languages of the past year, and have finally come of age - why not see what they’re capable of on their own? Makes life interesting.
Why in the world not? This is exactly the kind of content structure for which tables were created.
I don’t think I’m contradicting myself at all. The challenge simply states, no javascript. HTML5Shiv requires javascript to work, so it can’t be used. Period. It’s part of the rules.
What I’m talking about it graceful degradation. Taking restrictions like this and creating a working, functional page in all browsers takes skill and creativity. Does it have to look exactly the same? No - but it does have to function.
I simply meant that the 1k challenges forces you to be creative and original. You can’t be lazy and use jquery or yui. It’s all on you. That’s all I meant.
See, I disagree here. What this is promoting is to see how far you can push yourself and the browsers by using the basics, and not using all the little easy tips and hacks that are out there.
It’s amazing how many sites don’t work in mobile browsers, or on connections without javascript (which I have had to turn off due to OS restrictions and/or slow connections). To me, that’s lazy - creating something that’s functional for everyone is the sign of a true artist.
Because it isn’t fully supported by every major browser in use, and that is an important aspect of the competition.
If you really want to link it to the real world, then imagine this. We have had clients before who have specifically requested that we don’t use Flash (2 clients in the past 3 months in fact, so not that uncommon), so while it hasn’t happened yet, it isn’t beyond the realms of possibility that a client would request that you don’t use any JavaScript. Imagine a site that has to be as accessible as possible by many people who use screen readers, mobile devices etc, which can’t use JavaScript. Now this is also the type of site which will need to be open to as many different browsers as possible, including IE6.
There you have a real world situation which matches the rules of this contest. It’s about balance - sure, you can use HTML 5 to enhance the semantics of the site if you like, but with the downside that it isn’t properly supported by some browsers. It’s a trade-off, and trade-offs are most DEFINITELY something that happens in the professional world of web development!
So its entirely up to you whether you want to take the risk and gain points for semantic code but lose them for compatibility, or play it safe and ensure maximum compatibility while losing some semantics. It’s up to you, that’s what makes a competition like this fun and interesting!
This is what I was thinking about too. It’s really not that hard to imagine that you might have a stubborn client who insists that you make their site work in IE6 and without JavaScript enabled. What if your client himself uses IE6 and his nephew turned JavaScript off because he kept getting viruses from shady websites, and your client isn’t computer literate enough to know that 99.5% of people out in the world won’t see his website broken the way he does? What if he gets upset and irritated every time you try to explain it to him and starts thinking of going elsewhere? What if your site you’re making for him actually does cater to an audience where more than 20% of site users are just like your client? Would you fight him this much over his request or just work in older technologies?
Being flexible about the tools is a huge part of both good accessibility and good client management. I don’t know why people are bucking the rules so violently and not just trying to show that they can do a good job within the restrictions.
Being flexible about the tools is a huge part of both good accessibility and good client management. I don’t know why people are bucking the rules so violently and not just trying to show that they can do a good job within the restrictions.
The only reason I might be mentioning the rules, is because I’m not all that clear if I’ll be penalized and degraded for something that is not dis-allowed by the first 2 posts of rules, and there are a lot of things that those rules don’t mention.
Can we have a small revamp and clarification of the first 2 posts of rules?
Mentioning exactly what the judges will consider good, and what they will consider bad, especially with designs that have lots to do with text, typography, css-imagery and interactivity (css interactivity).
I think it’s a good idea to become more clear on the rules. I’ve posted a few times too asking for clarification. It just felt to me like some posters were being kind of antagonistic and trying to get the rules changed.