On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 6:23 AM, Matthew Kerwin <matthew@kerwin.net.au>
wrote:
> > Hmm, no. Physical width != display width. For example, on a "2x" screen
> a 100 (CSS) px resource has an intrinsic size of 200px. FWIW, this language
> follows CSS spec, and I'd prefer to keep it aligned.
> >
>
> I think the point is that the browser seems to be telling the server how
> big a requested image will be, which is ...presumptive. What it's actually
> describing is the screen space it intends to fill with said image.
>
> Unless "resource" means something else in the context of a HTML document?
> Since this is a HTTP spec, I took it to mean "thing at the other end of a
> URL."
>
> Perhaps just one extra word is enough: "...indicates the desired resource
> width..."
>
That's fair. Fixed.
> >> [snip]
> >>
> >> 10. IANA Considerations
> >>
> >> o Header field name: DPR
> >> o Applicable protocol: HTTP
> >> o Status: standard
> >> o Author/Change controller: IETF
> >> o Specification document(s): [this document]
> >>
> >> ...insert section # (applies to all definitions)
> >
> >
> > Hmm, does our tooling allow us to auto-generate these? =/
> >
>
> Yep; you label the heading thus:
>
> ### Foo Bar {#foo-bar}
>
> And refer to it:
>
> ...described in {{foo-bar}}...
>
Ah, good to know - thanks! Looks like Julian already beat me to it..
Received on Wednesday, 30 March 2016 21:33:33 UTC