Re: [whatwg] Throwing in my support for <picture> into the mix

On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Paul Court <paul@pmcnetworks.co.uk> wrote:

> First, I would like to suggest throwing <img srcset> out the window and
> into a landfill somewhere (It's not even fit for recycling!). This reminds
> me if the recent semi-colon in JavaScript "debate" that erupted as a result
> of @fat's code in the Twitter Bootstrap project - To one or two people who
> are very specialised in their particular area, it seems like a non issue -
> and I think that is the case with the <img srcset> syntax. From a browser
> developer point of view it might be easier to implement, but from a "I'm
> just learning to code" point of view, that syntax is bat-shit crazy!
>

It's a simple, unambiguous, extensible format.  If you don't like this
format, you probably dislike all of CSS, since they're in exactly the same
style.

and also shows similarity with the <video> tag already in use, so it should
> be easier to pick up.
>

See http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20120515#l-2856 for a brief
discussion about why the <video> pattern isn't a great one to follow.  It's
much more complex.

-- 
Glenn Maynard

Received on Wednesday, 16 May 2012 13:47:12 UTC