On Wed, 16 May 2012 21:11:41 +0100, Matthew Wilcox
m...@matthewwilcox.com wrote:
What solution do you have in mind that would let you add a 'tv'
breakpoint site-wide for all images that have been prepared for it,
without need to
update code that embeds those images? And is that really
On 17 May 2012 11:05, Kornel Lesiński kor...@geekhood.net wrote:
On Wed, 16 May 2012 21:11:41 +0100, Matthew Wilcox m...@matthewwilcox.com
wrote:
What solution do you have in mind that would let you add a 'tv'
breakpoint site-wide for all images that have been prepared for it, without
need
On Thu, 17 May 2012 14:16:24 +0100, Matthew Wilcox
m...@matthewwilcox.com wrote:
That particular solution is, to my mind, the most flexible and useful
implementation I've seen, because it's really about breakpoint
management and abstraction - which is what all responsive elements
need in
That particular solution is, to my mind, the most flexible and useful
implementation I've seen, because it's really about breakpoint
management and abstraction - which is what all responsive elements
need in order to work together well and be future-friendly.
It does, no doubt, have some
On Thu, 17 May 2012 15:13:58 +0100, Matthew Wilcox
m...@matthewwilcox.com wrote:
I'd also point out I'm not claiming this is a replacement for srcset
or picture. I think it's a useful additional tool for web
developers, but it is aimed at *site wide* generalised uses to make
life a lot easier
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
Am i right in believing that the srcset attribute are limited to
pixels? A unit that's dying out in all responsive designs? Is it
extensible to em, % etc? Because that's what's used.
On 16 May 2012 08:39, Chris Heilmann code...@gmail.com wrote:
On 16/05/2012 00:23, Kornel Lesiński wrote:
On
On Wed, 16 May 2012 10:33:05 +0200, Matthew Wilcox
m...@matthewwilcox.com wrote:
Am i right in believing that the srcset attribute are limited to
pixels? A unit that's dying out in all responsive designs? Is it
extensible to em, % etc? Because that's what's used.
I'm afraid you are confusing
The lack of em support is a concern though I understand the complications you
have brought up.
Using ems for media queries (which in turn dictate layout which in turn
dictates the image I want to load) is increasingly looking like a much wiser
decision than using pixels. A perfect example are
Tim Kadlec t...@timkadlec.com wrote:
The lack of em support is a concern though I understand the
complications you have brought up.
Using ems for media queries (which in turn dictate layout which in turn
dictates the image I want to load) is increasingly looking like a much
wiser decision
Oh, please do quote what you are answering. It's very hard to follow
such a conversation like this.
Matthew Wilcox m...@matthewwilcox.com wrote:
If there was a way to do this in JS, we'd have found it. Every time we
run up against the pre-fetch problem. In fact, it is only the
pre-fetch problem
On 16 May 2012 14:30, Odin Hørthe Omdal odi...@opera.com wrote:
Oh, please do quote what you are answering. It's very hard to follow
such a conversation like this.
OK, I am not sure what format to reply to emails with - some people
complain when quotes are left out entirely, other people
On Wed, 16 May 2012 08:40:46 -0500, Matthew Wilcox
m...@matthewwilcox.com wrote:
What's the actual WHATWG proscribed format for conducting conversations
in email
format?
See http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ#Should_I_top-post_or_reply_inline.3F
--
Mike Taylor
Opera Software
Cheers :)
On 16 May 2012 15:05, Mike Taylor mi...@opera.com wrote:
On Wed, 16 May 2012 08:40:46 -0500, Matthew Wilcox m...@matthewwilcox.com
wrote:
What's the actual WHATWG proscribed format for conducting conversations in
email
format?
See
On Wed, 16 May 2012 03:50:21 +0200, Silvia Pfeiffer
silviapfeiff...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Odin Hørthe Omdal odi...@opera.com
wrote:
I'm not sure. What do you think? As far as I've seen, you're highly
knowledgeable about video. Why do we have mediaqueries on
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 5:42 AM, Odin Hørthe Omdal odi...@opera.com wrote:
Tim Kadlec t...@timkadlec.com wrote:
The lack of em support is a concern though I understand the complications
you have brought up.
Using ems for media queries (which in turn dictate layout which in turn
dictates the
On Wed, 16 May 2012 20:09:13 +0100, D. Pitchford dpitchfo...@gmail.com
wrote:
What standards does not do in this situation is remove the actual work
effort in having to physically update each and every img's 'srcset'
string with new breakpoints during a redesign, no matter how terse the
The solution I've seen proposed[1] only aliases media query content, and
works only on a per-page basis, so it doesn't allow automatic addition of a
new image size site-wide, since you have to insert new source into every
picture anyway.
That is not true. With that particular solution you
Looking at the srcset proposal it appears to be recreating aspects of
media-queries in a terse less obvious form...
img src=face-600-200 at 1.jpeg alt=
srcset=face-600-200 at 1.jpeg 600w 200h 1x,
face-600-200 at 2.jpeg 600w 200h 2x,
face-icon.png
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 obvious form...
img src=face-600-200 at 1.jpeg alt=
srcset=face-600-200 at 1.jpeg 600w 200h 1x,
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 obvious form...
img src=face-600-200
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Bruce Lawson bru...@opera.com wrote:
1) the 600w 200h bit replicates the functionality of the familiar Media
Queries syntax but in a new unfamiliar microsyntax which many have argued is
ugly, unintuitive and prone to error
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:56 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
Importantly, I think I'd like to be able to use either min or max, but
@srcset's microsyntax only talks about min sizes. (I got it wrong in
my previous email.)
Well, it's not a media query. It *describes* the size of
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:56 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
Importantly, I think I'd like to be able to use either min or max, but
@srcset's microsyntax only talks about min sizes. (I got it wrong in
my
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
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 course this means we have lot more to write but at least this is
Am 16.05.2012 um 00:06 schrieb Chris Heilmann:
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
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
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Chris Heilmann code...@gmail.com wrote:
I also wonder what we do with videos? Surely they have the same issues and
there is no proposal for changing the syntax there. I do not like the syntax
of this. Yes it is more terse but it smacks of the horrible syntax of
Andy Davies dajdav...@gmail.com wrote:
Looking at the srcset proposal it appears to be recreating aspects of
media-queries in a terse less obvious form...
We've already got media queries so surelt we should be using them to
determine which image should be used and if media-queries don't have
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 8:37 AM, Odin Hørthe Omdal odi...@opera.com wrote:
Andy Davies dajdav...@gmail.com wrote:
Looking at the srcset proposal it appears to be recreating aspects of
media-queries in a terse less obvious form...
We've already got media queries so surelt we should be using
Silvia Pfeiffer silviapfeiff...@gmail.com skreiv Wed, 16 May 2012
00:57:48 +0200
Media queries come from the client side. They allow the author of a web
page to tell exactly how she want to lay out her design based on the
different queries. The browser *HAS* to follow these queries. And also,
Odin wrote:
It's heavily optimized for the usecase that will happen most often: for
retina type displays:
img src=odin-in-suit.jpg srcset=odin-in-s...@2.jpg 2x
Okay. This is also what Ted said about the srcset proposal and it makes a lot
of sense for that use case.
But it seems far less
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 for a *very common case* of
serving images
On Tue, 15 May 2012 23:57:48 +0100, Silvia Pfeiffer
silviapfeiff...@gmail.com wrote:
Media queries come from the client side. They allow the author of a web
page to tell exactly how she want to lay out her design based on the
different queries. The browser *HAS* to follow these queries. And
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Jeremy Keith jer...@adactio.com wrote:
Odin wrote:
1. How do we enable authors so that they can display different images under
different conditions based on art direction?
2. Enabling authors to provide different resolutions of images based on a
variety of
On 5/15/12 7:33 PM, Kornel Lesiński wrote:
In fact, I'd keep @media, because it serves some cases very well (I see
dpi/bandwidth optimisation as a problem orthogonal to layout adaptation:
http://geekhood.net/MediaQuery-vs-PerfQuery.png)
@media on video source is terrible for layout adaptation:
On 2012-05-15, at 7:23 PM, 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
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Odin Hørthe Omdal odi...@opera.com wrote:
Silvia Pfeiffer silviapfeiff...@gmail.com skreiv Wed, 16 May 2012 00:57:48
+0200
Media queries come from the client side. They allow the author of a web
page to tell exactly how she want to lay out her design based on
You might remember about my proposal 9 months ago. If not you can see it here:
https://gist.github.com/1158855
img src=http://cdn.url.com/img/myimage_xs.jpg;
media-xs=(min-device-width:320px and max-device-width:640px)
media-xs-src=http://cdn.url.com/img/myimage_xs.jpg;
40 matches
Mail list logo
