- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 15:27:48 -0700
- To: Chris Heilmann <codepo8@gmail.com>
- Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Chris Heilmann <codepo8@gmail.com> wrote: > I also wonder what we do with videos? Surely they have the same issues and > there is no proposal for changing the syntax there. I do not like the syntax > of this. Yes it is more terse but it smacks of the horrible syntax of > window.open properties and other comma separated visual attributes. <video> is a special case, unfortunately. It would be difficult to avoid using <source> there, but we shouldn't look at it as a good example in general. Using <source> introduces a lot of problems that would be good to avoid if possible. > From a semantic point of view this is a terrible mix of everything - > something that the picture proposal with multiple sources was not. There's no semantics in here - this is all presentation and usability. This is just a very compact way to state the information that <picture> presented more verbosely. <img srcset="foo.jpg 600w 2x"> is no more a "terrible mix of everything" than <picture> <source src=foo.jpg media="min-width:600px" resolution=2> </picture> is. > Let's not forget that this is a new use case - one that might get more > complex with more UA changes in the future. Maybe we have holographic images > soon with a X Y and Z position. Shoehorning this into the IMG element > doesn't make much sense to me. We should take care not to be future-hostile, but designing for all hypothetical futures just results in muddled, hard-to-use designs. Among current MQs, there are 2/4 (depending on if you count min/max separate) queries you definitely want to use, and one that *might* be useful (and which can be added to the microsyntax cleanly). I'm not aware of proposed future MQs that would be useful to tie into this functionality, either. > embed is the fallback to video with various sources. img is the fallback to > embed. I'd like to see picture - done like video for consistency as it is a > new use case for images. Old browsers could disregard them and new ones can > use mediaqueries to apply the different sources as needed. Yes, mediaqueries > do not all the things we need here and browsers have bugs loading various > sources instead of only one but these are things to fix in the browser > engines, not add an extra use case in the spec. See the blog post I wrote today so I'd have to stop giving this same argument over and over again. ^_^ <http://www.xanthir.com/blog/b4Hv0>. You simply can't make a good decision about which resolution to send to the user based on information from Media Queries. ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 15 May 2012 22:28:39 UTC