W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > April 2011

[Bug 12427] User interface of spatial media fragment URI in <img> or <video> resource, or in browser navigation

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 17:51:09 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1Q7Wsn-0003wY-WC@jessica.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12427

--- Comment #12 from Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> 2011-04-06 17:51:08 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> (In reply to comment #10)
> > (In reply to comment #9)
> > > > http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2010-August/027581.html
> > > 
> > > I'm not sure I understand this. What is "image sprite support" and why is
> > > cutting an image using the canvas 2d api not good enough?
> > 
> > Consider the general case of CSS spriting, which is currently done in a hacky
> > way with background-position.  Spriting into an <img> is just one instance of
> > this type of spriting that can't be done even hackily at present (without doing
> > something like running script to use <canvas>).
> 
> Is the goal of this to save bandwidth by putting several images into a single
> physical image?

Not bandwidth, but connections, yes.  Spriting isn't the best approach for
saving connections (better is resource packages, or a reworking of the internet
architecture like SPDY), but it's a decent stop-gap solution.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 6 April 2011 17:51:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 16:31:08 UTC