- From: Matthew Wilcox <mail@matthewwilcox.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 09:30:38 +0100
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: whatwg@whatwg.org, Aldrik Dunbar <aldrik@gmail.com>
As far as I'm aware SVG does not tackle the primary type of image an
<img> element diaplsys - photographic, non-vector images. SVG is not
applicable for enough uses.
-Matt
On 16 May 2012 07:17, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 6:23 PM, Aldrik Dunbar <aldrik@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi there,
>>
>> Adding a new *presentational* attribute/element for adaptive/responsive
>> images makes no sense and is not required. We already have a flexible
>> image format that can accomplish this — SVG, e.g.:
>>
>>
>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
>> <svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" viewBox="0 0 900 1135">
>> <desc>A painting by Edvard Munch, commonly known as "the scream".</desc>
>> <style type="text/css" ><![CDATA[
>> svg { background-size: 100% 100%; }
>> @media (min-width:477px) {
>> svg { background-image: url("https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f4/The_Scream.jpg"); }
>> }
>> @media (max-width:476px) {
>> svg { background-image: url("https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f4/The_Scream.jpg/476px-The_Scream.jpg"); }
>> }
>> ]]></style>
>> </svg>
>
> This is *way* more verbose than either <picture> or <img srcset>,
> doesn't interact with preloading, and doesn't do any kind of
> negotiation resolution. There are good reasons for the designs that
> have been discussed so far.
>
> ~TJ
Received on Wednesday, 16 May 2012 08:31:14 UTC