- From: Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>
- Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 10:02:10 -0500
- To: Paul Court <paul@pmcnetworks.co.uk>
- Cc: whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
(I wish people would stop starting new threads about the same topic.) On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 5:53 AM, Paul Court <paul@pmcnetworks.co.uk> wrote: > As a HTML author and programmer, I just cannot see myself implementing the > current srcset proposal on sites. As a programmer, it has very much got > what we would call a "bad code smell". > > <img src="face-600-200@1.jpeg" alt="" srcset="face-600-200@1.jpeg 600w > 200h 1x, face-600-200@2.jpeg 600w 200h 2x, face-icon.png 200w 200h"> > Actually, it's pretty clean; you've just made it ugly by sticking it all on one line. <img src="face-600-200@1.jpeg" alt="" srcset="face-600-200@1.jpeg 600w 200h 1x, face-600-200@2.jpeg 600w 200h 2x, face-icon.png 200w 200h"> It's no uglier than CSS syntaxes like background. Not to mention, what happens when a 3x device is released? > Do I have to change all my code again? > It'll use the best match, which is most likely the 2x version. I'm also confused about what exactly 1x and 2x are. Is it 2x 72 or 2x 96? > It means two hardware pixels per CSS pixel, which is what you get on iPhones, and also what you'll get if the user has zoomed in by 2x (eg. ctrl-+ in most desktop browsers). It's not related to DPI. and isn't 600-200@2 just the same as 1200-400@1? > First, "600w 200h" does not mean a 600x200 image; it means an image targetting 600x200 screens. Some syntax changes have been discussed to make this more clear. Second, the "2x" means the the width and height of the image are 1/2 the intrinsic dimensions of the image. For example, if you have a logo which is 400x150 on regular 1x displays, then a "2x" option would be an 800x300 image which is displayed as if you wrote <img src=url width=400 height=150>. That means it takes the same amount of space in CSS pixels--400x150--but you get the higher detail from the 2x density screen (like iPhones), without changing the layout of the page. -- Glenn Maynard
Received on Tuesday, 22 May 2012 15:04:54 UTC