Slob-like behaviour gets what it deserves. In general, we regard the use of style attributes as poor policy for which there is really no justification and are slowly trying to eliminate them. We have a number of style attributes lying around because we were too lazy to build a new class definition. We use CSS class attributes almost exclusively in HTML. Maybe we have, unconsciously, developed the site within the limitations of CSS2 over the years. Our pages use the following capabilities that we care about:ĬSS2 - we have no CSS3 and little desire to use it at this point. W3C Version of the WHATWG Living Standard (With some subtle differences - what joy) Our Pages Care About. They must be tearing their hair out in the W3C validation group. Just the sort of confidance building statement you want in a validation tool. And the poor old W3C page validator, which used to be a thing of great precision way back when, now validates every HTML5 with one warning which says (we paraphrase) '.this page validates at this precise second as HTML5 but may never, depending on the whim of some unaccountable group of individuals, validate again.'. At this stage (November 2013) this simply means removing all the negative stuff that HTML5 validators croak on. Our motivation is simply to get pages to validate as HTML5. We, so far, use no genuine HTML5 features - way too premature in our view (there is not, and never will be, a stable standard for goodness sake - just a flaky reference to Implemented and widely deployed).

It is more in the nature of a checklist for us than any deep or insightful HTML5 article. This page documents our conversion to HTML5 from HTML4.01 Transitional (started late 2013).

How convert html to html5