- From: Felipe Nascimento de Moura <felipenmoura@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 19:31:46 -0300
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: Yoav Weiss <yoav@yoav.ws>, Simon Sapin <simon.sapin@exyr.org>, Liam Quin <liam@w3.org>, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>, brice@websailors.fr
- Message-ID: <CAJVBkV=XLMQDFZyhX+_tonLf6rPNXiNPFLDgL5MBOUY4oxgRwg@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 2:19 PM, Felipe Nascimento de Moura > <felipenmoura@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> Yes, I wouldn't intend it to be anything more than a hint that the > >> browser is allowed to load it "later": after all critical resources > >> but then otherwise unconstrained (except that they must load when they > >> come into view). > > > > Well, this would be quite useful, no doubt! > > But wouldn't it give more power and options to developers if they could > > actually say that no image shall be downloaded unless they said so? > > I imagine it comparing that idea used by Google and Facebook in which > they > > load their scripts commented, and only "eval" it when they need, piece by > > piece. > > When it JS was created and allowed developers to get their content as > > string/text(and then eval it or not), I bet they never thought it would > be > > used that way, for those reasons. > > I mean, developers will find a way to make it useful in ways we can't > > imagine right now, as long as we give them options. > > More power isn't always more better. Authors can already choose when > to load an image, by just not putting it in the CSS at all, and > letting JS set 'background' or whatever later. > > > Telling the browser to prioritize or not a load is useful, but it would > also > > be useful to load the resources in another moment...for example, after a > > javascript has validated that the user is using a mobile device, or that > it > > is under a 3G connection or not. > > This is not something the JS dev should be worrying about in the > slightest; getting it right is very non-trivial (I talk about this > some in my blog post <http://www.xanthir.com/blog/b4Hv0>). It's > handled automatically by the image-set() function, which is in the > Image Values 4 spec. > > This is exactly the problem we face here where I work. We have about 4 million unique visitors per day...about 1.2 million are from mobile devices. We have tried many ways to deal with images, such as loading smaller images, then identifying if it is a mobile device and load a bigger image to replace the previous one... nowadays, we have a server side solution that redirects to "statified" pages that fit better in one or other kind of devices... I am pretty sure we could do much more with a few more options, such as deciding when to load images. As I said, the defer attribute would already help a lot...I am just not sure if this is all we can do about it. If there would be any other interesting, useful thing to do related to it, I think this is the moment to discuss :) > ~TJ > -- *Felipe N. Moura* Senior Web Developer Website: http://felipenmoura.org Twitter: @felipenmoura <http://twitter.com/felipenmoura> LinkedIn: http://goo.gl/qGmq Meet some of my projects: BrazilJS Conference <http://braziljs.com.br/> | BrazilJS Foundation<http://braziljs.org> | Power Polygon <http://github.com/braziljs/power-polygon> | TheWebMind<http://thewebmind.org/> | PHPDevBar<https://addons.mozilla.org/pt-BR/firefox/addon/php-developer-toolbar/> --------------------------------- LinuxUser #508332 *Changing the world* is the least I expect from myself!
Received on Wednesday, 3 July 2013 22:32:54 UTC