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

Re: [whatwg] Implementation complexity with elements vs an attribute (responsive images)

From: Jason Grigsby <jason@cloudfour.com>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 01:25:41 +0200
Message-Id: <62D6D6A7-D70B-4A73-9E2B-6FA93BACB0F0@cloudfour.com>
To: whatwg@whatwg.org
I didnít want to cloud my previous email with my opinions on various solutions, but as you may expect, I have some thoughts on the solutions to these two use cases.

On May 13, 2012, at 12:43 AM, Jason Grigsby wrote:

> Use case #1
> -----------
> Document author needs to display different versions of an image at different breakpoints based on what Iím calling, for a lack of a better phrase, art direction merits.

A solution to this use case should put 100% of the control in the hands of authors. It should provide the same control over images in html that is granted to authors over css images by media queries.

> Use case #2
> -----------
> For a variety of reasons, images of various pixel density are needed. These reasons include current network connection speed, display pixel density, user data plan, and user preferences.

A solution to this use case should allow an author to supply a list of images at different densities (or better yet an image in a format that supports multiple densities), BUT the user agent should decide which image density is right for the situation.

Ideally, the user agent would make a decision about the appropriate image based on:

* Connection speed
* Display density
* Data plan
* User preference

Obviously not all of these can be supported currently and the list isnít necessarily comprehensive. The point Iím making is that there are multiple factors to picking the right density. The user agent is in the best position to make these decisions.

-Jason
Received on Saturday, 12 May 2012 23:26:12 GMT

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