Goodbye,
HTML5 specification editor Ian Hickson decided to exclude the <time> element from HTML5. Those who use <time> now, such as sites like Github, Reddit and WordPress (the default WordPress theme from 2.6 million installations), and Opera browser developers will have to change <time> to <data> or hope that Hickson change his mind.
According to Hickson himself, <time> has three typical uses.
A. More convenient indication of date / time in CSS.
B. Marking the date / time of the publication of the document (for example, for export to Atom).
C. Specifying the time and date in a machine-readable form for use in microformats and microdata.
Hickson believes that <time> never became a popular method for A and B. As for the third option, <data> is better suited here.
')
Many developers in the same discussion thread expressed their disagreement with such an opinion of Ian Hickson, especially with his thesis about the unpopularity of <time>. In addition to the mentioned Github, Reddit and WordPress, this element is used on many websites. In reality, it is used much more widely than many other HTML5 elements, which no one thinks to exclude from specifications.
In addition, the unpopularity argument looks particularly strange with regard to the part of the specifications that are not yet finished and not officially accepted. For example, many microformats could well be edited under <time>, but only after the official approval of the W3C standard.
Ian Hickson is partly right in that no browser has implemented microdata processing, in particular, <time>. The only exception was the new Opera engine , but this browser, unfortunately, is not considered to be a serious player worldwide.
Bruce Lawson of Opera called <time> rejecting an “unsuccessful solution” because it was a tag with a clear syntax, strictly limited scope and no additional syntax, as in <data>.
Despite the final status of the decision to refuse <time>, some developers do not lose hope and create "opposition" tickets in the bug tracker.
UPD 11/06/2011: W3C returned the <time> element back to HTML5
According to Hickson himself, <time> has three typical uses.
A. More convenient indication of date / time in CSS.
B. Marking the date / time of the publication of the document (for example, for export to Atom).
C. Specifying the time and date in a machine-readable form for use in microformats and microdata.
Hickson believes that <time> never became a popular method for A and B. As for the third option, <data> is better suited here.
')
Many developers in the same discussion thread expressed their disagreement with such an opinion of Ian Hickson, especially with his thesis about the unpopularity of <time>. In addition to the mentioned Github, Reddit and WordPress, this element is used on many websites. In reality, it is used much more widely than many other HTML5 elements, which no one thinks to exclude from specifications.
In addition, the unpopularity argument looks particularly strange with regard to the part of the specifications that are not yet finished and not officially accepted. For example, many microformats could well be edited under <time>, but only after the official approval of the W3C standard.
Ian Hickson is partly right in that no browser has implemented microdata processing, in particular, <time>. The only exception was the new Opera engine , but this browser, unfortunately, is not considered to be a serious player worldwide.
Bruce Lawson of Opera called <time> rejecting an “unsuccessful solution” because it was a tag with a clear syntax, strictly limited scope and no additional syntax, as in <data>.
Despite the final status of the decision to refuse <time>, some developers do not lose hope and create "opposition" tickets in the bug tracker.
UPD 11/06/2011: W3C returned the <time> element back to HTML5
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/131729/
All Articles