- From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2012 11:35:09 +0200
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "WHATWG List" <whatwg@whatwg.org>, "Fred Andrews" <fredandw@live.com>
- Cc: John Mellor <johnme@chromium.org>
On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 06:07:30 +0200, Fred Andrews <fredandw@live.com> wrote: > > >> From: jackalmage@gmail.com > ... >> I'm not sure how best to solve this, but John Mellor suggested >> allowing the specification of the image's native dimensions somehow. >> That way, the browser could know that the 1600.jpg image is >> appropriate to serve as an 800px wide high-dpi image, or a 1600px wide >> low-dpi image. > > John has a proposal here: > http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2012-August/036958.html > e.g. '<img srcset="320x120, 320.jpg 1x, 640.jpg 2x, 1280.jpg 4x, > 2560.jpg 8x">' . As I understand it John's proposal only declares the > image sizes and is not intended for making a selection based on density > or screen size directly? If what's necessary here is to declare the intrinsic dimensions, why not use the width="" and height="" attributes for this? (They can be overridden with CSS if you want e.g. 100% width.) -- Simon Pieters Opera Software
Received on Friday, 7 September 2012 09:35:56 UTC