W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-respimg@w3.org > November 2012

RICG Planning Meeting Minutes - 11/14/12

From: Mathew Marquis <mat@matmarquis.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 12:05:50 -0500
Message-Id: <24997117-14F0-44F3-8503-4225D6972378@matmarquis.com>
To: public-respimg@w3.org

Marcos Caceres (MC)
Yoav Weiss (YW)
Mat Marquis (MM)
David Newton (DN)
John Albin (JAW)
Shane Hudson (SH)
Geri Coady (GC)
Agustín Amenabar (AA)
Jesse Beach (JB)

Feedback from TPAC:
MC: The RICG needs to tone down a little when talking to WHATWG/browser vendors. Negative perception of our group. However, TPAC presentation helped win back some friends.
MM: A lot of this likely stems from initial “picture vs. srcset” blowout of almost a year ago; a lot of this talk is still happening. Should take steps to defuse anywhere we can.
MC: Positive feedback from Microsoft
MC: Not all browser vendors cannot participate in the RICG for IPR reasons, so stuff need to move the the HTML-WG soon.
MC: That would enable Ted O'Connor and MS ppl to participate

`picture` spec and `srcset`:
YW: browser vendors have an issue with media queries part of `picture`
AA: What are the issues that have been raised? 
YW: AA, please see https://github.com/ResponsiveImagesCG/picture-element/issues/9
MM: yes, this is a problem. But I like the way img@srcset works. However, there needs to be a solution to art direction problem (for img@srcst).
MM: we need to get everyone on board that @srcset is part of `picture` as we see it.
MM: we should define in the picture spec how we want @srcset to work in terms of “should be treated as a set of suggestions, left up to the UA.”
MM: This is in the `srcset` draft spec now; perhaps we should reiterate in terms of `picture`
MM: MQ should remain as absolutes—you wouldn’t want the wrong *size* image for your layout. Resolution, through `srcset`, is something the UA could override based on user settings and such.
MC: As the RICG did originally, we should explore other declarative syntaxes for `srcse`t. From speaking to browser folks, there seems to be consensus that the current syntax sucks. 

ACTION: Reach out to community to start discussing a more dev-friendly @srcset syntax - https://github.com/ResponsiveImagesCG/meta/issues/17

Advancing `srcset`:
MC: Let's work on a better syntax for srcset
MC: With the use-cases and requirements, documents are good
MC: RE the <picture> spec, we need to closely match impl and spec
MC: reference-implementation, hack picturefill to match browser implementation
MC: Odin has a reference implementation of srcset
MM: The plan is to open a bug for each use-case ( https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=17061 )
MM: The use-cases are ready to go through with that plan
YW: Feedback from Henri Sivonen is that if srcset is defined with css pixels, it should resolve the zoom usecase
MM: We need to look into that

ACTION: File bugs against img@srcset where they don't meet the requirements. See: https://github.com/ResponsiveImagesCG/ri-usecases/issues/22 (MC, MM)

MC: The demos are awesome, but we need to redo some of the demos
MC: add an dynamically-captured-image demo (i.e., from Camera) that let's you select multiple breakpoints
MC: we also have a repo for a demo template: https://github.com/ResponsiveImagesCG/demos/
GC: We have an updated template for responsiveimages.org that includes a link to demos, and examples of responsive image pattens in use (Dribbble.com, Microsoft.com, etc.) in the header
MM: Coding that now; will be ready in time for FPWD push.
MC: Should be live in time for traffic rush when FPWD push is announced.
MM: Will include updated demo landing page, as well

ACTION: Complete responsiveimages.org index and demo landing page (GC, MM)

Getting document to W3C Fist Public Working Draft:
MM: First public working draft announcement will likely lead to even more community involvement/feedback
MC: We should plan for media impact for big announcements
MC: The website should be ready with a cohesive story
MM: Once we have both [`picture` extension spec/use case] documents ready, we should publish. Website will be ready in time.

ACTION: Find out what we need to do to move spec to FPWD - https://github.com/ResponsiveImagesCG/ri-usecases/issues/23 (MC, MM)
ACTION: Create milestones in the right repos on Github (MC). 

Drupal 8 launch
JAW: Drupal has `picture` support in version 8 - but its at risk if the spec is not stable
JAW: It may have to be dropped if `picture` won't look like it's going to happen by April
MC: AVG standardization process takes 5 years
MM: Will follow up with Drupal team to see if FPWD by Feb 1 will cut it.
MC: We should investigate ways to make it work for Drupal 8 as a "Plan B"
MM: Suggest use of div-based `picturefill`.
JB: That could work.
JAW: Will look into it.

ACTION: Follow up with Drupal team to see if FPWD by Feb 1 code freeze will be sufficient (JAW, MM).

Received on Thursday, 15 November 2012 17:06:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:06:08 UTC