- From: Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>
- Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 17:51:27 +0200
- To: Orion Adrian <orion.adrian@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
Orion Adrian wrote: >Content negotiation is a good means of what I'm talking about. It >allows for fallback mechanisms without the pain. It should also be >fairly trivial to create an image in a non-lossy format and create >packages for the major web server systems that would automatically >convert the image to something they end client could use caching the >results for a period of time. > How is that trivial? I might be able to do that on my simple PHP-based website, but I don’t have the code for it, and I am not exactly looking forward to facilitating that. On non-dynamic web sites it’s even less of an option. More so, would anyone be actually going to take the effort to do that? Doubt it. The caching mechanism would also heavily impact my space allowance, and having the original as an uncompressed image even more so. With regard to the ‘fallback’ technique in XHTML 2.0 where one can nest a number of image sources which are resolved based on the browser’s support for the type - I am not particularly fond of that application (just one of the many though), but I think it is nice to offer such an alternative to content negotiation over HTTP. Moreover, it mainly comes with the current methods in XHTML 2.0 ‘for free’, and is not a goal by itself for structuring things the way they are. ~Grauw -- Ushiko-san! Kimi wa doushite, Ushiko-san!! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Laurens Holst, student, university of Utrecht, the Netherlands. Website: www.grauw.nl. Backbase employee; www.backbase.com.
Received on Monday, 4 July 2005 15:51:30 UTC