Re: [whatwg] RWD Heaven and responsive-images
The above is just a my proposal in advancing this discussion, and until there is no feedback about this from people on the RWD Heaven: if browsers reported device capabilities in a request header and the add html-attribute for responsive images threads, and other developers concerned in Responsive Web Design, I don't think I should just create the group and hope that the discussion will just move and concentrate there on its own. So open for feedback on this! Kind regards to all, Viktor I’m certainly not opposed to a more productive venue for hashing out some of these issues, but I still worry that we’re backtracking. We’ve already covered a lot of the same ground on this list as a large group of us did months ago ( https://etherpad.mozilla.org/responsive-assets is one of many venues in which this took place ). While I’m in no way railing against having a bunch of new eyes on this problem and new potential solutions, I’m afraid of going back and rehashing the same ideas for the sake of people just joining the conversation. By the time we reach a conclusion—possibly the same conclusion—and present it to the list again, who’s to say we wouldn’t find ourselves repeating the process all over again? Basically, I’d want to ensure that any discussion within the group takes place in a very public and easy-to-digest way, so we have an easy reference for people joining the conversation late in the game. I’d also love to see a representative from each of the big browsers and a couple of people close to the standards process directly involved, so we can stay as focused and productive as possible. I’m happy to reach out to people, to those ends. Any way you slice it, you’re right that this list isn’t the place for continued discussion of this sort. Viktor, if you’re willing to set up such a group, that’s probably a more appropriate venue—at least for the time being.
[whatwg] RWD Heaven and responsive-images
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 2:19 AM, Jason Grigsby ja...@cloudfour.com wrote: On Feb 8, 2012, at 8:04 AM, Ronjec Viktor wrote: People, this is really getting out of hand... 1. WHATWG is a standards body, meaning it _standardizes_ solutions. Everyone who followed the discussion up until now can easily tell that currently there is no unified, or even close to common approach to this topic yet. Someone says the solution is on server-side, the other one says it's on the client-side, the third one says network protocol, the forth says headers... This is not the place for such a discussion IMHO. As a newcomer to the list, I’ve tried to wade in lightly because I’m not certain how these things work. So I’m pleased you wrote that. My question would be where should the conversation happen then? It seems that within the authoring community finding a solution to handling images has been a hot topic for months. But my experience has been that whenever I see attempts to bring the conversation to people deeply involved in the standards process, the problems are often dismissed or many objections are raised the proposed solution. Two weeks ago I was talking with Ernesto Jiménez about how the W3C and WhatWG efforts needed feedback and participation from authors. But it is unclear to me how that should happen. To wit, we have a problem that many of us have being trying to solve. I for one don’t have confidence that those of us who are commonly outside the standards-setting process have the correct answer. I’d be happy for someone smarter than me to propose solutions that move things forward. To make that happen, it seems necessary to convince people that an actual issue exists and to discuss potential solutions somewhere. So an honest and humble question, if that doesn’t happen here, where does it happen? -Jason On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Matthew Wilcox m...@matthewwilcox.com wrote: +1 to everything Jason Grigsby just said. If not here, where? If not with you, with who? We've been doing this publicly for months and months... To prevent being labelled as a troll for questioning the merit of such ambiguous discussion on WHATWG, I have contacted people for help. Dominique Hazaël-Massieux, who himself has made proposals on solutions concerning the topic to the W3C HTML Working Group (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011May/0386.html) has recommended to me that maybe creating a Community Group at W3C would be in order. Community Groups differ from Working Groups in that participants of the discussion are trying to find a common ground for consensus on what a solution should be to a given problem, before proposing it for standardization to a standards body. In my opinion, until everyone is proposing something else (e.g. HTTP headers, SPDY protocol, device classes, new markup with new alt tags, etc) we create the following CG and move the discussion there: Proposed name: Adaptive Media Community Group Proposed group description: The Adaptive Media Community Group is a community of web developers seeking a solution so that embedded media in HTML (e.g. images and videos using the img and video), and their properties (e.g. dimension, compression ratio) are optimum to given factors, such as device screen resolution or available network bandwidth. Proposed shortname for CG: adaptmedia Of course, creating a CG would be completely meaningless if there is no interest and support for it from the community. I believe there is interest for it, but the question is, is there support for it? The above is just a my proposal in advancing this discussion, and until there is no feedback about this from people on the RWD Heaven: if browsers reported device capabilities in a request header and the add html-attribute for responsive images threads, and other developers concerned in Responsive Web Design, I don't think I should just create the group and hope that the discussion will just move and concentrate there on its own. So open for feedback on this! Kind regards to all, Viktor
Re: [whatwg] RWD Heaven and responsive-images
Nice work Victor, I'm all for that but I am hesitant as to how effective it will be. The thing is, we need the feedback from the people in this list to notice stumbling blocks. The CG could spend weeks honing a solution only to have it presented here and blown away because someone for here knows something intricate that the CG community didn't. That's a worry. -Matt On 9 February 2012 14:00, Ronjec Viktor ronjec.vik...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 2:19 AM, Jason Grigsby ja...@cloudfour.com wrote: On Feb 8, 2012, at 8:04 AM, Ronjec Viktor wrote: People, this is really getting out of hand... 1. WHATWG is a standards body, meaning it _standardizes_ solutions. Everyone who followed the discussion up until now can easily tell that currently there is no unified, or even close to common approach to this topic yet. Someone says the solution is on server-side, the other one says it's on the client-side, the third one says network protocol, the forth says headers... This is not the place for such a discussion IMHO. As a newcomer to the list, I’ve tried to wade in lightly because I’m not certain how these things work. So I’m pleased you wrote that. My question would be where should the conversation happen then? It seems that within the authoring community finding a solution to handling images has been a hot topic for months. But my experience has been that whenever I see attempts to bring the conversation to people deeply involved in the standards process, the problems are often dismissed or many objections are raised the proposed solution. Two weeks ago I was talking with Ernesto Jiménez about how the W3C and WhatWG efforts needed feedback and participation from authors. But it is unclear to me how that should happen. To wit, we have a problem that many of us have being trying to solve. I for one don’t have confidence that those of us who are commonly outside the standards-setting process have the correct answer. I’d be happy for someone smarter than me to propose solutions that move things forward. To make that happen, it seems necessary to convince people that an actual issue exists and to discuss potential solutions somewhere. So an honest and humble question, if that doesn’t happen here, where does it happen? -Jason On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Matthew Wilcox m...@matthewwilcox.com wrote: +1 to everything Jason Grigsby just said. If not here, where? If not with you, with who? We've been doing this publicly for months and months... To prevent being labelled as a troll for questioning the merit of such ambiguous discussion on WHATWG, I have contacted people for help. Dominique Hazaël-Massieux, who himself has made proposals on solutions concerning the topic to the W3C HTML Working Group (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011May/0386.html) has recommended to me that maybe creating a Community Group at W3C would be in order. Community Groups differ from Working Groups in that participants of the discussion are trying to find a common ground for consensus on what a solution should be to a given problem, before proposing it for standardization to a standards body. In my opinion, until everyone is proposing something else (e.g. HTTP headers, SPDY protocol, device classes, new markup with new alt tags, etc) we create the following CG and move the discussion there: Proposed name: Adaptive Media Community Group Proposed group description: The Adaptive Media Community Group is a community of web developers seeking a solution so that embedded media in HTML (e.g. images and videos using the img and video), and their properties (e.g. dimension, compression ratio) are optimum to given factors, such as device screen resolution or available network bandwidth. Proposed shortname for CG: adaptmedia Of course, creating a CG would be completely meaningless if there is no interest and support for it from the community. I believe there is interest for it, but the question is, is there support for it? The above is just a my proposal in advancing this discussion, and until there is no feedback about this from people on the RWD Heaven: if browsers reported device capabilities in a request header and the add html-attribute for responsive images threads, and other developers concerned in Responsive Web Design, I don't think I should just create the group and hope that the discussion will just move and concentrate there on its own. So open for feedback on this! Kind regards to all, Viktor
