The website <http://html5test.com/> tests browsers for the existence of HTML5 features and can be used to gauge the progress of features. I'd like to see WebKit hit 300/300 before the other engines do. Note that this site only currently checks for the existence of features, not that they are correct.
Current scores (running on Mac OS X 10.5 PPC):
WebKit 533 (Safari 5): 208 + 9.
Firefox 3.6.3: 139 + 4.
Opera 10.53 (Presto 2.5.24): 129 +4.
WebKit r61351: 230 + 9.
Firefox 3.6.4 (Build 7): 139 + 4
Note that I have the Xiph.org Ogg/Theora/Vorbis plugin installed, giving my machine an extra point.
I forgot the iPhone!
iPhone 3G, iPhone OS 3.1.3 (iOS 3.1.3):
WebKit 528.18: 125 + 7
Opera Mini: 22.
iPhone 3G/iOS 4, WebKit 532.9: 185 + 7
I'm not sure if getting 300/300 on this test should necessarily be a goal. But it's interesting that this test claims there's no "HTML5 tokenizer" or "HTML5 tree building" in ToT.
The very first subtest fails: div.innerHTML = "<div<div>" is expected to add a node with name "DIV<DIV".
WebKit r61744: 231 + 9
What is ToT?
WebKit r62241 235/300 +9
WebKit r62632: 236 + 9
WebKit r62909: 232 + 9.
(In reply to comment #2)
> iPhone 3G/iOS 4, WebKit 532.9: 185 + 7
This is being tracked for iPhone using: <rdar://problem/8215076>
We also have radars covering differences between Safari 5 and iOS 4.0.x, so there's no need to file other bugs.
We will also eventually pick up fixes committed to trunk as well.
WebKit r63958: 222 + 10
I’m all for progress, but after the fun with HTML5 form validation I’d prefer usable HTML implementations over rushing to ship:
That said, keep on truckin’ Webkit peeps :)
WebKit r65398: 227 + 10 (Tokenizer now detected!)
(In reply to comment #11)
> WebKit r65398: 227 + 10 (Tokenizer now detected!)
Why did the score go down from a high of 236 + 9 in Comment #6?
(In reply to comment #12)
> (In reply to comment #11)
> > WebKit r65398: 227 + 10 (Tokenizer now detected!)
> Why did the score go down from a high of 236 + 9 in Comment #6?
Mainly due to WebGL being broken/gone. That is 10 points there.
Webkit r66052: 232+12 !
WebKit r71484: 233 + 12! <output> now supported & detected.
WebKit r74228: 235 + 12, I'm guessing figure and figcaption support.
May I request that we move the URL to http://beta.html5test.com/ and change the title to "Get 400/400 points on the HTML5 Test"?
I get 288 + 9 points, on r75891 at http://beta.html5test.com/. Note, to enable WebGL, you have to do:
defaults write com.apple.Safari WebKitWebGLEnabled -bool YES
In normal, I get 245+15. In beta, I get 288+15. This is with WebGL plus every media plugin imaginable.
(In reply to comment #17)
> May I request that we move the URL to http://beta.html5test.com/ and change the title to "Get 400/400 points on the HTML5 Test"?
I think if any tests should be strived for, the stable release tests should be the priority over the beta tests. While 400/400 sounds better, the beta tests could be updated at any time completely hosing the score of anything being tested.
(In reply to comment #18)
> I get 288 + 9 points, on r75891 at http://beta.html5test.com/. Note, to enable WebGL, you have to do:
> defaults write com.apple.Safari WebKitWebGLEnabled -bool YES
Has WebGL been re-enabled? I have it turned on but none of the WebGL code runs.
The HTML5 test has been updated, it is now 400 points!
Here's how the browsers do (based on what I can run on 10.5 PPC ;) ):
* WebKit r80210: 273 + 12
* Safari 5.0.3: 228 + 9
* Safari (iOS 4.2.1): 206 + 7
* Firefox 3.6.14: 155 + 4
* Opera 10.63: 214 + 7
I would also like to see this.
In fact - I would be happy with a base score of 300 points - Just 9 more to go! :D
WebKit r83424: 271 + 15
I updated Perian which now supports WebM, so that accounts for the bonus improvement. I wonder what broke to lower the main score?
WebKit r83750: 271 + 15
WebKit r88189: 269 + 15
293 and 13 bonus points
Best so far! :D
Is there a bug for http://www.html5accessibility.com/HTML5ASS/
(In reply to comment #27)
> Is there a bug for http://www.html5accessibility.com/HTML5ASS/
You should just create one.
Safari 5.0.6 (5533.22.3): 293 + 15.
I went through the test suite this afternoon and broke down all our failures in this spreadsheet:
The end result is that we're already the "best" engine according to html5test.com, and almost all of the remaining tests we either already pass (and the suite is wrong) or we have code in progress (either behind compile-time flags, or with webkit- prefix guards).
About the only interesting implementation work left might be <command> (bug 58454), HTMLInputElement.dirname (bug 76766), and seamless iframes (bug 45950).
As of the 2012-01-01 update:
* Safari 5.0.6 (5533.22.3) on 10.5.8 PPC: 302 + 15
WebKit r134216 (OS X 10.8.2 Intel 64): 388+15
Safari 6.0.2 (OS X 10.8.2 Intel 64): 378+15