W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-respimg@w3.org > October 2012

The media queries approach… was, Re: How responsive is responsive?

From: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2012 14:34:19 +0100
To: Bruce Lawson <brucel@opera.com>
Cc: public-respimg@w3.org, Brett Jankord <bjankord@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <94FEB58B53BF41E8B536629E330FCA31@marcosc.com>


On Friday, October 5, 2012 at 8:13 AM, Bruce Lawson wrote:

> On Wed, 03 Oct 2012 18:06:55 +0100, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com (mailto:w3c@marcosc.com)> wrote:
>  
> > Following on… The WHATWG Responsive Images proposal currently makes the  
> > "responsive" aspect completely optional:
> >  
> > "The user agent may at any time run the following algorithm to update an  
> > img element's image in order to react to changes in the environment.  
> > (User agents are not required to ever run this algorithm.)"
> >  
> > While what the RICG is proposing is that the responsive algorithm always  
> > runs and always responds to the environment (like CSS Media Queries do).
> >  
> > Is the above correct?
>  
> yes, I think so.
>  

Ok, this is now central to the architecture of the solution we are putting together [0].  

As I pointed out yesterday, issues have been raised around the relying on Media Queries approach [1], [2] - and it cannot not address the bandwidth case (probably nothing can).

We need clever people here to either show it is not an issue or find ways of working around them with a satisfactory solution.  

[0] http://wilto.github.com/draft-prop/ResponsiveImages.html
[1] http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2012-October/037538.html
[2] http://www.xanthir.com/blog/b4Hv0  

--  
Marcos Caceres
Received on Monday, 8 October 2012 13:34:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 8 October 2012 13:34:51 GMT