W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > June 2011

Re: Adaptive images

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 10:43:39 +0900
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=+BJ0jXnujr1iWV1eCGUbxvZXAmA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
Cc: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Karl Dubost <karld@opera.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 11:28 PM, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> wrote:
> From: Henri Sivonen [mailto:hsivonen@iki.fi]
>> On Tue, 2011-05-31 at 06:48 -0700, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:
>>> Correct.  And that's fine for web/server-hosted content.
>>> However, consider an EPUB3 file where there is no negotiation going on.  So you'd (most likely) need something in the <img> tag that would list the alternatives and then have those connected (via id/name) to CSS queries so the UA would know which one to pick.
>> If you've transferring the whole epub bundle to the end user anyway, why
>> bother having multiple versions of images instead of having a high-res
>> image and letting the client downsample? Are you optimizing client CPU
>> and RAM use instead of the epub bundle size?
> Because alternates are _NOT JUST_ about resolution - they can also be completely different images based on layout.  For example, the image that I want to show in portrait may not be the same as the one that I show in landscape - so I would have both versions in the documents.

This is no longer about multiple versions of the same image, then -
it's about multiple different images, based on your dynamic layout.
This should be handled by CSS, in the manner described earlier in this
thread (using the 'content' property, which currently isn't powerful
enough to satisfy this use-case, but *should* be).

Received on Wednesday, 1 June 2011 01:44:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:16:14 UTC