Re: maxHeight and maxWidth

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>
wrote:

> On 2/17/2016 3:15 PM, Peter Thatcher wrote:
>
> If upscaling is not allowed, then I it's impossible to meet a requirement
> of "must be exactly 90 pixels in height".  ​
>
>
> I think this may have been mis-stated, or mis-understood.  My
> understanding is that some applications are going to display thumbnails in
> a fixed-size bar, or may be sent to other things that in their
> layout/UI/etc have a fixed-space for it, and for those putting an upper
> limit on size makes a ton of sense.  If the size is smaller than that -
> that's ok, you scale it up to the desired size *at the receiver*; you don't
> spend bits sending upscaled video on the wire.  If for some unknown reason
> the receiver can't scale it up - it decodes it and shows it
> letterboxed/inset/whatever.
>

​The use case originally expressed in this thread said the receive must
receive exactly 90 pixels in height.  But perhaps they meant that it has to
be 90 pixels or less and while the receiver can't scale, it can inset, as
you say.

Adam, do you know which your proposed use case is?  Can the receiver to
inset of something smaller than 90 pixels in height?  If so, can it do
cropping of something slightly larger than 90 pixels in height?


>
> I think layouts (both in-browser and in fixed-function devices) will often
> have a preferred thumbnail size - or will only occasionally change the
> preferred size.
>
> --
> Randell Jesup -- rjesup a t mozilla d o t com
> Please please please don't email randell-ietf@jesup.org!  Way too much spam
>
>