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

Re: [whatwg] Features for responsive Web design

From: Markus Ernst <derernst@gmx.ch>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 20:07:04 +0200
Message-ID: <50770AC8.3050303@gmx.ch>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: Tim Kadlec <tim@timkadlec.com>, "whatwg@whatwg.org" <whatwg@whatwg.org>
Am 11.10.2012 18:36 schrieb Ian Hickson:
> On Thu, 11 Oct 2012, Markus Ernst wrote:
>> IMHO as an author, the "bandwidth" use case is not solved in a future
>> proof manner
> It's not solved at all. I didn't attempt to solve it. Before we can solve
> it, we need to figure out how to do so, as discussed here (search for
> "bandwidth one"):
>     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-whatwg-archive/2012May/0247.html

It looks like my English is not perfectly understandable, I am sorry I 
am not a native English speaker. I did not try to state the use case was 
solved. I have been following the discussion in this list quite closely.

My point is, that any device-specific notation, such as "2x", forces the 
author to make decisions that the browser should actually make. The 
author does not know if in a few years the image will be viewed with 
1.5x or 3x or 7x or whatever devices.

This is why I'd humbly suggest to put information on the image in 
@srcset rather than info on the device and media. Such as:

srcset="low.jpg 200w, hi.jpg 400w, huge.jpg 800w"

Where "200w" is the actual image width and not the viewport width. Like 
that every browser can decide which source to load based on the display, 
and available bandwidth or user setting or whatever.
Received on Thursday, 11 October 2012 18:07:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:09:17 UTC