- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 08:05:13 -0700
- To: Kornel Lesiński <kornel@geekhood.net>
- Cc: whatwg <whatwg@whatwg.org>
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 4:30 AM, Kornel Lesiński <kornel@geekhood.net> wrote: > My suggestion is that the srcset (or <picture>) should assume that images > are "2x" scale by default. > > My reasoning behind is: > > - we have <img> for easy embedding of 1x images today, but we don't have 2x > <img> for the future. Having to specify width/height in <img> all the time > is annoying. > > - highdpi displays will become dominant at some point, it's only a matter of > time (they pretty much are already in high-end smartphones, and are going to > appear in laptops next). Bandwidth is also going to be less of a concern, so > it'll be rational and desirable to serve images for the 2x resolution only > (and just rely on 96dpi displays scaling them down). I think this will be a confusing change that will hurt more than it helps. URLs in @srcset should act exactly like URLs in @src, except where modified by the descriptors. > Necessity to specify 2x scaling all the time will become a bad default and a > historical quirk (like the DOCTYPE), and a source of annoyance where > accidentally omitted "2x" syntax makes images large and pixelated. I think that 2x only looks like a good default now. I would bet that in less than 10 years 3x or higher will look like a good default. I'd rather not bake in a confusing change that doesn't actually future-proof anything. ~TJ
Received on Thursday, 17 May 2012 15:06:10 UTC