- From: Bruno Racineux <bruno@hexanet.net>
- Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 02:15:58 -0800
- To: Anselm Hannemann <info@anselm-hannemann.com>
- Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@whatwg.org>
On 11/12/13 12:19 AM, "Anselm Hannemann" <info@anselm-hannemann.com> wrote: >Also the different attributes have very inconsistent >new micro-syntaxes with different values which is not very good for a >webstandard. The attributes I have presented are not necessarily set in stone. They can be inlined or improved. I am only introducing a new early logic of implementation. > > >Therefore it gets even harder to understand than the current src-N >approach. >Please never forget to think about that this has to be writable by every >normal web developer. I am normal web developer myself. It so much easier to me than having to repeat a path again and again in a very long endless 'value', that keeps repeating the same logic over and over for every image,especially in the case of a gallery of images. I think the way it segments concerns into separate parts actually makes it much legible. You can discern right way how many set of images you have. Say a plugin which introduce its new image definition within the platform, is identifiable right way. The css breakpoints themselves could be tokenized, but I didn't get to that part. >Introducing RegEx not only >slows down a browser but also will make this unusable for a lot of people >who donšt understand this. Regex is already part of the HTML5 form validation syntax. It's not any more unusable or slow than the 'pattern' attribute for the input element. I very much dislike the use of regex in an interpreted language, but the argument that regex done by the browser would be slow, is not even a slight remote concern. The amount of bytes that srcset or src-N will bear onto the download of a page is worth way more milliseconds in waiting time, that it is for a couple regex to execute in c++... Any normal web developer who suck at regex rules (myself included) does not really need to understand regex either. Good examples on stackoverflow would be sufficient for that.
Received on Tuesday, 12 November 2013 10:16:33 UTC