Using the term 'HTML5' in the title of the item(items are HTML4)

Japh said
Let’s face it, marketing based on “HTML 5” is pretty slim anyway. Marketing should be based on features, not a specific version of a specific technology. Saying “HTML 5” will pretty soon be like saying “HTML”, and what sort of marketing would it be to say “This website contains HTML ”?

Good point, but I think that happens all the time throughout most industries. For example, a new car that features the most recent break-technology; they are obviously going to slam that onto the front of every advertisement.

And honestly, if the car actually features and relies on that very break-technology, I have no problem with them telling it to everyone. I would have a problem if they advertise something they do not even offer/have.

If your html declares an HTML5 Doctype, it is HTML5 , the fact it doesn’t use all the new fancy html tags is the authors choice.

I don’t get all the fuzz over this.

proxdeveloper said
If your html declares an HTML5 Doctype, it is HTML5 , the fact it doesn’t use all the new fancy html tags is the authors choice. I don’t get all the fuzz over this.

Tis is not true, HTML5 is not just the doctype.

HTML5 means the DOCTYPE , nothing more, nothing less. Whether or not every element you use on the page is new in HTML5 or not, it doesn’t matter. You can see every line of code by looking at the source because nothing is obfuscated and HTML is a client-side language so nothing is hidden behind the scenes so all your arguments are invalid. If you’re that hurt over it, fight fire with fire and declare the HTML5 doctype, advertise it as such, and deal with the pain in the ass that is validating an HTML5 doctype every few months as W3C changes their standards.

It’s obvious that some of you are new here because back in the day, a highly advertised bullet point was that a theme was HTML 4 or XHTML Strict or Transitional, and so on because it matters when it comes to how code must be written and how W3C validates it.

/discussion

My guess is the average buyer sees the word “HTML5” and expects to see Flash-like elements that work on Apple mobile. I also think that only about 10% of buyers see HTML5 and think “validation”.

Now I’m not saying I think it’s okay to slap a HTML5 doctype and call it an HTML5 in the title for marketing purposes…

But another sort of silly thing about this whole situation is that all themes on TF have a preview that you can easily view the source of or inspect with a developer tool before purchasing. If you’re complaining that it has HTML5 in title, but then you have the know-how to assess that it doesn’t have HTML5 elements within the markup, you could have easily diagnosed that before purchasing the theme.

So my point is that users, authors, whoever may define an “HTML5 theme” in different ways, however no matter what’s in the name of the theme, it is what it is, and it’s there for you to see.

I use HTML5 too. Because, in my first template, I didn’t mention this, and a buyer mailed me that a HTML5 player is not working. Why is not working. Blah blah blah. So, since then, the doctype is HTML5 , if the item has HTML5 elements, good, if not, the buyer or whoever customizes his files can add them without trouble.

Plus validation, plus certain elements do not work right in HTML 4 Strict and so on. So, in my humble opinion, it’s fine to say ” HTML5 ” in the title. It saves the buyer time, plus the page is 100% ready for HTML5 elements

Enabled said
I use HTML5 too. Because, in my first template, I didn’t mention this, and a buyer mailed me that a HTML5 player is not working. Why is not working. Blah blah blah. So, since then, the doctype is HTML5 , if the item has HTML5 elements, good, if not, the buyer or whoever customizes his files can add them without trouble. Plus validation, plus certain elements do not work right in HTML 4 Strict and so on. So, in my humble opinion, it’s fine to say ” HTML5 ” in the title. It saves the buyer time, plus the page is 100% ready for HTML5 elements

well this is a very good point! so as I said before: if it is declared as HTML 5 it is actually an HTML 5 document! It renders and validates as HTML 5 so it supports any HTML 5 element, even though it doesn’t have any by default!

Yeap! I will always do that to my files. Maybe I want to update it later on, and add a custom video player or a music player, what then? I must re-arrange all elements all items to match HTML5 new guidelines?

HTML5 does not support rel=”bla” for colorbox for example, but html4 does. What then, validate all errors, fix this, fix that, fix this, fix that. No. I declare it HTML5 and code around it from the beginning, then, if someone uses it or I update it, it’s easier for me and the buyer! This is a very good point and reason why everyone should code directly to HTML5

But this is just my humble author opinion!

if all the attributes are given in the css, it includes html5 elements or not as long as it is <!doctype html> it is an html5 template no matter what you say or think, including html5 elements is the easiest thing to do for anybody that can edit a template a bit for example;

< video ></ video >