- From: Markus Ernst <derernst@gmx.ch>
- Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 19:32:34 +0100
- To: Bruno Racineux <bruno@hexanet.net>
- Cc: whatwg <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>
Am 20.11.2013 06:24 schrieb Bruno Racineux: > On 11/19/13 12:12 PM, "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch> wrote: > >> On Tue, 19 Nov 2013, Markus Ernst wrote: >>> >>> I can't recall the reasons why Florian's proposal of combining >>> <picture> >>> and @srcset fell out of the discussion. To me it still looks like the >>> most useable draft so far. >> >> I responsed to proposals along those lines last year: >> >> >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-whatwg-archive/2012Aug/0070.htm >> l >> >> Search for "multi-element" for the specific response to proposals that >> involve multiple elements. > > There are other concerns against any non-centralized approaches like > <picture>. [...] > Any author used to the flexibility of css shouldn't have the burden to > deal with hard-coded unalterable stuff like that. It's as bad as an inline > css-style to deal with. I do totally agree with you. AFAICS, all proposals with a significant amount of support (picture, srcset, src-N) share this problem. I don't have the impression that adding centralization has much support right now. Anyway, once there is a consent about the respImg syntax, it may be easier to propose a centralisation mechanism at the CSS side, e.g. some variable or constant useable in the MQ.
Received on Wednesday, 20 November 2013 18:33:05 UTC