W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-respimg@w3.org > February 2013

Re: CfC: to publish "The srcset attribute" specification as a First Public Working Draft (FPWD)

From: Anselm Hannemann <info@anselm-hannemann.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 10:34:13 +0100
To: Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>
Cc: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>, Edward O'Connor <eoconnor@apple.com>, public-html-admin@w3.org, public-respimg@w3.org
Message-ID: <4D401CA51CC444FBA12A2C53011C0AAB@anselm-hannemann.com>
On Thursday, 7. February 2013 at 10:11, Robin Berjon wrote:
> On 06/02/2013 23:39 , Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
> > I'm not sure if you saw this on the thread about the picture element
> > CfC: after understanding that the two specifications are not competing
> > with each other but are meant to complete each other to cover the
> > responsive images use cases, I was left to wonder why we have two
> > separate specifications.
> >  
> There's still some open discussion about which use cases need to be  
> tackled, and how.

While this is true, both specifications currently tackle different use-cases and for now are not yet fully compatible to each other.
This should be fixed by next weeks but the use-cases will always be different:
- picture is for art-direction mainly and is a completely new element while  
- the srcset attribute is an attribute which should be usable on picture and img element.

For that I think authoring both specifications together to reach a good goal is important but I don't think we should merge
both specifications into one covering all.

Anselm Hannemann – @helloanselm
> > Would be able to work with picture element proponents to come up with
> > one specification to cover a broader range of the user cases?
> >  
> I think that's precisely the plan!
> --  
> Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Thursday, 7 February 2013 09:34:39 UTC

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