Re: Initial work on an extension specification for <img srcset>

Hi,

I wrote:

> I'll work with Mike Smith to get [the <img srcset> extension spec]
> published on dev.w3.org[.]

Thanks to Sam, this is done; you can read the current Editor's Draft
on dev.w3.org here:

                    http://dev.w3.org/html5/srcset/

Mat wrote:

> There’s a great deal of overlap between this proposal and the current
> `picture` proposal[…] How do we best address this?

I'm not sure I understand the question. It's true that both features
attempt to address some of the same use cases. They're both being
pursued as extension specifications. Assuming "Plan 2014" gets adopted,
extension specs can proceed on an independent timetable.[1]

> Should the Responsive Images Community Group prepare a change proposal
> based on the WHATWG draft[?]

Under this WG's Decision Policy, Change Proposals are only relevant to
the Escalation Process. There's been no escalation, so no one has to
write Change Proposals. [Phew! :)]

> We’re putting together a comprehensive list of use case comparisons —
> how each pattern might address some of the use cases we’ve nailed down
[…]
> https://github.com/Wilto/draft-prop/blob/master/UseCaseComparisons.md

Interesting; thanks for the link!

> and I’d like to see proponents of the `srcset` pattern contribute to
> this[…]

I haven't written any introductory text for the srcset spec yet; I'll
try to make sure to address the use cases listed on that page with
relevant prose & examples.


Thanks,
Ted

1. If an extension spec meets the HTML5 CR exit criteria before the main
   spec's CR period ends, it would be a candidate for being folded into
   the main spec. But it doesn't have to be folded into the main spec;
   it could be regarded as an "applicable specification" by the relevant
   constituencies.

Received on Tuesday, 2 October 2012 22:14:57 UTC