W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > May 2012

Re: [whatwg] <img srcset> for responsive bitmapped content images

From: Kornel Lesiński <kornel@geekhood.net>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 22:51:12 +0100
To: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
Message-ID: <op.wd34bmhrte2ec8@aimac.local>
On Thu, 10 May 2012 16:02:22 +0100, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>  
wrote:

>> I can’t second Scott’s suggestion enough. There is a ton of history and  
>> valuable conversation around this topic already in the Community Group,  
>> and we’ve been working with a couple of browser reps trying to get this  
>> thing solved. We’ve even gone so far as to put the solution that seems  
>> to have the most legs together as a sort-of spec, so all the details  
>> are in one easily-parsed place: https://github.com/Wilto/respimg
>
> The Responsive Images work is intended to solve a different issue than
> the "send high-res versions if you have the screen and bandwidth to do
> so".  It's for serving different images based on various MQ
> conditions, just baked into HTML markup rather than hacking it in via
> backgrounds.  MQs, though, are a fundamentally unsound method for
> doing bandwidth-responsive image serving.  I gave the basic example of
> why it fails in an earlier message in this thread.

Indeed. I think there's a confusion around this in general, and  
"responsive images" mean different things to different people.

While the solution that Responsive Images group leans towards is  
appropriate for solving layout problems, the description of group's goals  
sounds more like solving optimisation/dpi problems. I think these are  
orthogonal issues and both of them may be worth solving.


I've tried to sort problems/use-cases here:

http://www.w3.org/community/respimg/2012/04/16/summary-of-use-cases-and-requirements/

-- 
regards, Kornel Lesiński
Received on Thursday, 10 May 2012 21:51:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 30 January 2013 18:48:08 GMT