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

Re: [whatwg] Features for responsive Web design

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 14:12:14 +1000
Message-ID: <CAHp8n2=cMMiuGx83XojFetibnipYXDK=VnsrBEtutEsGNXyzwg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kornel Lesiński <kornel@geekhood.net>
Cc: whatwg <whatwg@whatwg.org>, Jacob Mather <jmather@itsmajax.com>
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Kornel Lesiński <kornel@geekhood.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 17 May 2012 02:29:11 +0100, Jacob Mather <jmather@itsmajax.com>
> wrote:
>
>> As I said, I understand that it is a hard problem, but the question
>> is, is it the correct problem.
>>
>> There are plenty of reasons not to do it, but is there any actual
>> reason that the approach is less correct than the current proposals?
>
>
> Yes, trading off latency to save bandwidth is definitely an incorrect
> approach. Bandwidth will keep increasing much faster than latency decreases
> (and there are hard physical limits to decreasing latency, while bandwidth
> could go up to infinity).
>
> On high-latency high-bandwidth connections (satellite, 3G/4G) it may already
> be cheaper to download all versions of all images than to wait for CSS to be
> able to select the right ones to load. Solution that requires page layout
> for image loading is a step backwards for performance.


Maybe the metrics that we are suggesting for resources can help:
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12399 .
When measuring bytesReceived, downloadTime, and networkWaitTime for
resources loaded, it is possible to track available bandwidth and
latency and thus find out what type of network connection one is on.
This may help with making decisions?

Silvia.
Received on Friday, 18 May 2012 04:13:07 GMT

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