- From: Matthew Wilcox <mail@matthewwilcox.com>
- Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 10:34:03 +0000
Can you clarify why the image would be loaded twice? Can we not, as part of the logic for the <picture> element, say that <img> is ignored in supporting browsers? Thus, never called by a supporting browser. Non supporting browsers wouldn't load the <src> elements and would only load the <img> Right? On 7 February 2012 10:31, Anselm Hannemann <anselm at novolo.de> wrote: > Am 07.02.2012 um 11:16 schrieb Matthew Wilcox: > > 2012/2/7 Anselm Hannemann ? Novolo Designagentur <anselm at novolo.de> > >> Ashley, >> >> so you think about the <img> element attributes like I proposed? >> <img src="myimage_xs.jpg" media-xs="(min-device-width:320px and >> max-device-width:640px)" media-src-xs="myimage_xs.jpg" >> media-m="(min-device-width:640px and max-device-width:1024px)" >> media-src-m="myimage_m.jpg" media-xl="(min-device-width:1024px)" >> media-src-xl="myimage_xsl.jpg"> >> (View as gist: https://gist.github.com/1158855) >> > > This, to me, is WAY too over-wrought to be useful. Readability is a > feature of HTML and this kind of kills that a little - it looks like > something some automated solution would spit out, not what a human would > author. I can't imagine it getting much uptake with web developers for that > reason alone (I put my hand up, I'm a member of that fickle bunch). > > > Yeah this is indeed true. I just want this as an option which is a > semantically valid approach. But you're totally right at readability. > > To me this makes most sense /from an author perspective/ (I make no claims > as to how practical this really is): > > <picture> > <src href="small.jpg" alt="a headshot of Bob Flemming" > media="min-width:320" /> > <src href="medium.jpg" alt="a head and shoulders shot of Bob Flemming" > media="min-width:480" /> > <src href="large.jpg" alt="a full body portrait of Bob Flemming" > media="min-width:640" /> > > <!-- fallback for old browsers with no support for picture element) --> > <img src="default.jpg" alt="A photo of Bob Flemming" /> > </picture> > > The reason being: > > * it's easy to read > * it uses familiar element structures and properties > * it allows us to adjust to any given media requirement, not just screen > size (you could query bandwidth with this syntax, though I contest > bandwidth is the domain of server side adaption rather than client side) > > > This is a good solution except the fallback img element would be twice > loaded in your case which is not good. > There should be the img element containing the standard (normal) size and > src elements to add diff. other resolutions. With that the browser won't > load the resource twice. >
Received on Tuesday, 7 February 2012 02:34:03 UTC