- From: matmarquis.com <mat@matmarquis.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 10:22:58 -0500
- To: Mateus Souza <mateussouzaweb@gmail.com>
- Cc: James Graham <james@hoppipolla.co.uk>, whatwg@lists.whatwg.org
On Nov 21, at 8:50 AM, Mateus Souza wrote: > Agree, but maybe a new tag element can do the trick, or an adaptation of > the picture element could be a better solution. > >  Unfortunately `image` is a common alias of `img`, which doesn’t allow child elements—it’ll close itself upon encountering the next tag. In order to avoid that, we’d need a new unencumbered element name. You’re actually following the line of reasoning that led up to the original `picture` proposal, which is oddly comforting to see. You might get a kick out of reading through http://etherpad.mozilla.org/responsive-assets, where the proto-RICG originally started throwing ideas around. > > My ideai is just make all attributes responsive, and today, i do not see a > solution without javascript or css polyfill. > > > > *Mateus Souza - Webdeveloper Freelancer*http://mateussouzaweb.com | > @mateussouzaweb <https://twitter.com/mateussouzaweb> > > > 2013/11/21 James Graham <james@hoppipolla.co.uk> > >> On 21/11/13 13:07, Mateus Souza wrote: >> >>> <img src="large.jpg" media="screen and (min-width: 800px)"... >>> <img src="small.jpg" media="screen and (max-width: 300px)"... >>> >> >> This appears cause multiple images to load in the case that this feature >> isn't supported (i.e. in all current browsers). That isn't an acceptable >> fall back behaviour. >>
Received on Thursday, 21 November 2013 15:19:14 UTC