W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-respimg@w3.org > October 2013

Re: What do we do with picture?

From: Attiks <attiks@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 11:13:08 +0200
Message-ID: <CAM7OHztXhwLa0MqUfY6BEvnZD-zHd2ETLYcyz_7Lu3uvL+xonw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kornel Lesiński <kornel@geekhood.net>
Cc: Aaron Grogg <aarontgrogg@gmail.com>, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>, Yoav Weiss <yoav@yoav.ws>, Anselm Hannemann <info@anselm-hannemann.com>, "public-respimg@w3.org" <public-respimg@w3.org>
Hi,

I'm as well am prefering the picture syntax and the fact that the polyfill
have proven that it works even for older browser, I'm a bit worried on how
src-N is going to behave on older browsers, would love to see a working
polyfill before deciding to 'eliminate' the picture proposal.

Cheers,
Peter



On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Kornel Lesiński <kornel@geekhood.net>wrote:

>  That's my thought too. I'm just tired by the
>
> --
> regards, Kornel
>
> On 18 October 2013 05:38:06 Aaron Grogg ** wrote:
>
> From a purest-view, I really prefer <picture>.  I think the code is more
> readable, more memorable, and also like how the <picture> syntax mirrors
> <video>.  It almost (gasp!) feels like consistency...
>
> From a pragmatist-view, I really want something yesterday, and if either
> srcset or srcN is going to get us to a responsive image solution faster,
> then "ok, whatever".  I know, however, that I am *always* going to have
> to look up syntaxes for both of these solutions, but then I don't build
> websites for me, I build them for users.
>
> So, I guess, whatever gets us to a solution faster, I'm good with.
>
> Atg
>
>
> Atg
> ----------------------------------------------------
> *Aaron T. Grogg
> *
> *website: http://aarontgrogg.com/*
> *email: aarontgrogg@gmail.com
> *twitter: @aarontgrogg
> *skype: aarontgrogg*
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 1:30 AM, Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, October 17, 2013 at 11:32 PM, Simon Pieters wrote:
>>
>> > Similarly for crossorigin, usemap, ismap, width, height, .naturalWidth,
>> > .naturalHeight, .complete, painting on a canvas, interaction with CSS
>> > stuff like object-fit, UI features like the context menu, and so on.
>>
>> This can't be understated. There are all massive free wins that we had
>> completely left out of picture due to complexity.
>>
>> --
>> Marcos Caceres
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Friday, 18 October 2013 09:13:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:12:40 UTC