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

Re: [whatwg] Correcting some misconceptions about Responsive Images

From: Odin Hørthe Omdal <odinho@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 09:59:14 +0200
To: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org, "Chris Heilmann" <codepo8@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <op.wed5s0d049xobu@odinho-fido.oslo.osa>
On Wed, 16 May 2012 09:42:46 +0200, Chris Heilmann <codepo8@gmail.com>  
wrote:
> <img src=data: srcset="foo.jpg 1x, foo2.jpg 2x"  
> style="display:none;"><noscript><img src="foo.jpg"></noscript>
>
> So we praise the terse syntax of it and then offer a NOSCRIPT for  
> backwards compatibility? Now that is a real step back in my opinion.

Please, read Tab's full email. No need to willfully mislead people just to  
create a flame war like this.

You know as well as we do as that the backwards compat story is:

     <img src=foo.jpg srcset="foo.jpg 2x">

Extra <noscript> is only for a *Javascript* polyfill that will give you  
the behavior in current browsers. That means, only those who absolutely  
want switching to work with browsers not having implemented it, should use  
something like this.

In fact, polyfilling other solutions will require the exact same, because  
you'd have to cater for people having Javascript turned off.

However, you can also polyfill the simple version, but you would get two  
requests in some browsers if you do that. So you can optimize what you  
want. The only thing we're talking about

-- 
Odin Hørthe Omdal (Velmont/odinho) · Core, Opera Software, http://opera.com
Received on Wednesday, 16 May 2012 08:00:01 GMT

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