On 16/05/2012 00:23, Kornel Lesiński wrote:
On Tue, 15 May 2012 23:17:54 +0100, Chris Heilmann code...@gmail.com
wrote:
The fetish for brevity is something I never understood. More
understandable code is faster to write than cryptic short code.
There is significant difference in verbosity
img src=data: srcset=foo.jpg 1x, foo2.jpg 2x
style=display:none;noscriptimg src=foo.jpg/noscript
So we praise the terse syntax of it and then offer a NOSCRIPT for
backwards compatibility? Now that is a real step back in my opinion.
On 15/05/2012 22:46, Bruce Lawson wrote:
On Tue, 15 May 2012 22:18:51 +0100, Tab Atkins Jr.
jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Andy Davies dajdav...@gmail.com
wrote:
Looking at the srcset proposal it appears to be recreating aspects of
media-queries in a terse less
On 15/05/2012 23:11, Anselm Hannemann Web Development wrote:
Tab, maybe you think this is a good type to write the syntax but the majority
of normal web developers are used to use common HTML syntax. This is why we
proposed the picture element and normal attributes using media queries.
Of
