Why do you include specifications that are not part of HTML5?
+
+
+ HTML5 means different things to different people. You could argue that HTML5 only includes features that are
+ defined in the W3C HTML5 specification. Or you could argue that it includes every specification, draft or
+ experimental feature that is added to browsers in the last couple of years. We decided to take the middle
+ ground and split the test into three parts: the official HTML5 specification, specifications that are related
+ to HTML5 and some experimental new features that are extensions of HTML5.
+
+
+ Many of the related specifications were at one time part of HTML5. During the development of the specification
+ they were moved to separate specifications.
+
+
+
+
But WebGL isn't even a W3C specification!
+
+ The W3C isn't the only organization that creates open specifications for the web. The WebGL specification is
+ published by Kronos, the same group that is also responsible for OpenGL. WebGL is related to HTML5 though and
+ listed as one of the HTML5 technologies on the W3C HTML5 logo page. The W3C HTML5 specification allows the
+ canvas element to be extended by new drawing methods and WebGL is one of them.
+
+
+
Why do you test for Web SQL?
+
+ The Web SQL specification has been deprecated and replaced by the IndexedDB specification. It is however
+ still commonly used on mobile phones and at least three vendors have shipped desktop browsers supporting Web SQL. We've decided to include
+ this specification, but make it a special case. Web SQL is worth 5 points, but only if IndexedDB is not supported.
+ IndexedDB is worth 10 points. If a browser supports both, only 10 points are awarded. This way browsers
+ that only included IndexedDB are not penalized, but browsers that only support Web SQL do get some points.
+
Why do you include specifications that are not part of HTML5?
-
-
- HTML5 means different things to different people. You could argue that HTML5 only includes features that are
- defined in the W3C HTML5 specification. Or you could argue that it includes every specification, draft or
- experimental feature that is added to browsers in the last couple of years. We decided to take the middle
- ground and split the test into three parts: the official HTML5 specification, specifications that are related
- to HTML5 and some experimental new features that are extensions of HTML5.
-
-
- Many of the related specifications were at one time part of HTML5. During the development of the specification
- they were moved to separate specifications.
-
-
-
-
But WebGL isn't even a W3C specification!
-
- The W3C isn't the only organization that creates open specifications for the web. The WebGL specification is
- published by Kronos, the same group that is also responsible for OpenGL. WebGL is related to HTML5 though and
- listed as one of the HTML5 technologies on the W3C HTML5 logo page. The W3C HTML5 specification allows the
- canvas element to be extended by new drawing methods and WebGL is one of them.
-
-
-
Why do you test for Web SQL?
-
- The Web SQL specification has been deprecated and replaced by the IndexedDB specification. It is however
- still commonly used on mobile phones and at least three vendors have shipped desktop browsers supporting Web SQL. We've decided to include
- this specification, but make it a special case. Web SQL is worth 5 points, but only if IndexedDB is not supported.
- IndexedDB is worth 10 points. If a browser supports both, only 10 points are awarded. This way browsers
- that only included IndexedDB are not penalized, but browsers that only support Web SQL do get some points.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Scoring
-
-
What is the maximum number of points you can score?
-
- If a browser passes all tests it would receive the maximum score of 555. Previous
- versions of the HTML5test had less tests and therefore also a lower maximum score, such as 160, 300, 450, 475 and 500 points.
- Previous versions of this test also awarded bonus points for some features, but as of version 5, we
- no longer do.
-
-
-
The scoring seems arbitrary, who decides how many points are awarded?
-
- We decided to award points for each feature depending on how important that feature is for web developers
- and how difficult it is to implement that feature. A small and simple feature would be worth less points than a
- large and complicated feature. We think this is the most honest way to grade browsers, because otherwise a browser
- that only supports the small and simple features would score as high or higher than a browser that went the
- extra mile and decided to tackle the big features. But in the end it is based on personal preference,
- but I doubt there is a truly objective alternative.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Reporting
-
-
Can my browser be included on the 'other browser' and 'compare' pages?
-
-
- We would love to add new browsers, but not all browsers are eligible. First of all we only accept browsers that
- are publicly available, either in beta form or a final release. We do not accept scores for internal development builds.
- Secondly we only accept browsers that are available in English. We want to check browsers before including them and
- unfortunately we do not speak Chinese, Japanese, Korean or Russian. And finally we only accept browsers which have a
- unique score. There are many browsers that are forks or modified versions of Chromium or Firefox. Similarly there
- are many browser that embed Internet Explorer or Webkit as provided by the operating system. These browser
- do not qualify. For comparisons, simply choose the original browser on which the browser was based instead.
-
-
- We retain the right to make exceptions to any of the rules above and to remove or refuse any browser we deem
- necessary.
-
-
-
-
What happens when a browser cheats?
-
-
- We cannot distinguish between a browser that supports a particular feature and a browser that lies about supporting
- that feature. The only way to deal with these situations it to manually confirm the test results. And if a browser
- is found to be overly confident about claiming support for certain features we can put that browser on a blacklist.
- That means that that even though the browser claims to support a particular feature, we ignore what the browser says and do
- not give any points. This is usually just a temporary problem and once the browser has been fixed we will remove
- the new version from the blacklist.
-
-
- Claiming to support a feature which isn't working is not just causing problems for the reliability of the
- test results, but there are other real-world problems. For example if you claim to support WebGL, a website may decide
- to serve WebGL content. If your browser does not support WebGL, the website may fail in an uncontrollable way. If you
- correctly denied support for WebGL, the website may have served alternative content that would work in your browser.
- If you claim to support features that you don't, you are breaking the web.
-
-
- If we find that a browser is structurally lying about which features they support - deliberately or not - we will
- usually give a warning to the developers of the browser and if the problem hasn't been fixed in the next version
- we will remove the browser from the 'other browser' and 'compare' pages and/or give other penalties. In extreme
- cases we may block the browser from showing test results and show a warning instead.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Methods
-
-
Why are you using browser sniffing?
-
-
- Unfortunately, in two very specific cases we are forced to use browser sniffing. The first case is contentEditable
- which was not supported on many older mobile devices. Yet almost all mobile browsers claim to support contentEditable.
- Fortunately modern mobile devices are starting to support contentEditable, but this left us with a problem. We
- cannot reliably detect if a browser has proper support. The only way around this is to use a whitelist of
- mobile browsers that do support this feature, otherwise you risk awarding points to mobile browsers that they
- do not deserve. The second case is drag and drop, which is also not supported on mobile phones and tablets.
-
- Please open a new issue on Github when you believe a
- browser should be included on the whitelist.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Privacy
-
-
What kind of data is collected from visitors?
-
-
- Each time you visit this website your score and test results are logged on our servers.
- We also store the user agent of your browser which contains information about the browser,
- operating system and device you are using. The collected information is solely used to
- generated anonymized reports about HTML5 support in browsers and improve the quality of
- our software.
-
-
- We do not store cookies in your browser, but we do use several external components that do,
- including: Google Analytics, BuySellAds, Facebook, Twitter and Google+.
-
-
+
+
Scoring
+
+
What is the maximum number of points you can score?
+
+ If a browser passes all tests it would receive the maximum score of 555. Previous
+ versions of the HTML5test had less tests and therefore also a lower maximum score, such as 160, 300, 450, 475 and 500 points.
+ Previous versions of this test also awarded bonus points for some features, but as of version 5, we
+ no longer do.
+
+
+
The scoring seems arbitrary, who decides how many points are awarded?
+
+ We decided to award points for each feature depending on how important that feature is for web developers
+ and how difficult it is to implement that feature. A small and simple feature would be worth less points than a
+ large and complicated feature. We think this is the most honest way to grade browsers, because otherwise a browser
+ that only supports the small and simple features would score as high or higher than a browser that went the
+ extra mile and decided to tackle the big features. But in the end it is based on personal preference,
+ but I doubt there is a truly objective alternative.
+
+
+
+
+
+
Reporting
+
+
Can my browser be included on the 'other browser' and 'compare' pages?
+
+
+ We would love to add new browsers, but not all browsers are eligible. First of all we only accept browsers that
+ are publicly available, either in beta form or a final release. We do not accept scores for internal development builds.
+ Secondly we only accept browsers that are available in English. We want to check browsers before including them and
+ unfortunately we do not speak Chinese, Japanese, Korean or Russian. And finally we only accept browsers which have a
+ unique score. There are many browsers that are forks or modified versions of Chromium or Firefox. Similarly there
+ are many browser that embed Internet Explorer or Webkit as provided by the operating system. These browser
+ do not qualify. For comparisons, simply choose the original browser on which the browser was based instead.
+
+
+ We retain the right to make exceptions to any of the rules above and to remove or refuse any browser we deem
+ necessary.
+
+
+
+
What happens when a browser cheats?
+
+
+ We cannot distinguish between a browser that supports a particular feature and a browser that lies about supporting
+ that feature. The only way to deal with these situations it to manually confirm the test results. And if a browser
+ is found to be overly confident about claiming support for certain features we can put that browser on a blacklist.
+ That means that that even though the browser claims to support a particular feature, we ignore what the browser says and do
+ not give any points. This is usually just a temporary problem and once the browser has been fixed we will remove
+ the new version from the blacklist.
+
+
+ Claiming to support a feature which isn't working is not just causing problems for the reliability of the
+ test results, but there are other real-world problems. For example if you claim to support WebGL, a website may decide
+ to serve WebGL content. If your browser does not support WebGL, the website may fail in an uncontrollable way. If you
+ correctly denied support for WebGL, the website may have served alternative content that would work in your browser.
+ If you claim to support features that you don't, you are breaking the web.
+
+
+ If we find that a browser is structurally lying about which features they support - deliberately or not - we will
+ usually give a warning to the developers of the browser and if the problem hasn't been fixed in the next version
+ we will remove the browser from the 'other browser' and 'compare' pages and/or give other penalties. In extreme
+ cases we may block the browser from showing test results and show a warning instead.
+
+
+
+
+
+
Methods
+
+
Why are you using browser sniffing?
+
+
+ Unfortunately, in two very specific cases we are forced to use browser sniffing. The first case is contentEditable
+ which was not supported on many older mobile devices. Yet almost all mobile browsers claim to support contentEditable.
+ Fortunately modern mobile devices are starting to support contentEditable, but this left us with a problem. We
+ cannot reliably detect if a browser has proper support. The only way around this is to use a whitelist of
+ mobile browsers that do support this feature, otherwise you risk awarding points to mobile browsers that they
+ do not deserve. The second case is drag and drop, which is also not supported on mobile phones and tablets.
+
+ Please open a new issue on Github when you believe a
+ browser should be included on the whitelist.
+
+
+
+
+
+
Privacy
+
+
What kind of data is collected from visitors?
+
+
+ Each time you visit this website your score and test results are logged on our servers.
+ We also store the user agent of your browser which contains information about the browser,
+ operating system and device you are using. The collected information is solely used to
+ generated anonymized reports about HTML5 support in browsers and improve the quality of
+ our software.
+
+
+ We do not store cookies in your browser.
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/assets/csp.html b/assets/csp.html
index 6d1c9f73..da28f24b 100644
--- a/assets/csp.html
+++ b/assets/csp.html
@@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
-
+
+
+
-
\ No newline at end of file
+