- From: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
- Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 19:05:21 +0100
- To: John Albin Wilkins <john@albin.net>
- Cc: John Allan <JAllan@habaneroconsulting.com>, "matmarquis.com" <mat@matmarquis.com>, "public-respimg@w3.org" <public-respimg@w3.org>
On Monday, July 29, 2013 at 6:36 PM, John Albin Wilkins wrote: > One of the common complaints about some of these syntaxes is that they are "too difficult to write". Having a tool that automatically generates the proper markup (like a CMS) makes that problem moot. So, kinda - the solution should be designed so that a machine can generate the output: this is fundamental to any markup language. However, if the solution is so complex that the only way that it's usable is to machine-generate-it with a tool, then the solution is likely broken (there are some exceptions to this in complex domains, but I think this generally holds). > The direction Drupal picture integration is headed is to an auto-configuration option. If the system knows the meta data about a responsive layout, a site builder could place a picture into a specific region of the layout and the system could auto-configure and generate the full HTML of any markup needed. I think that is a good thing - but we should continue to strive to create solutions that don't require computer assisted design to be used by default. It adds complexity (the addition of a tool) to the design process. -- Marcos Caceres
Received on Monday, 29 July 2013 18:05:58 UTC