There seem to be two proposals for what syntax to use for the responsive
images use case: several elements vs. an attribute.
I think an attribute is simpler to implement and thus likely to result in
fewer bugs in browsers, which in turn benefits Web developers.
With , in the parser case, al
Alright... so what's next? I'm assuming this needs further discussion with
other WHATWG members chiming in. If I can help, please let me know. I'd
like to see this request through.
Sincerely,
James Greene
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 12:26 PM, Simon Pieters wrote:
> On Fri, 11 May 2012 17:1
On Fri, 11 May 2012 17:14:00 +0200, James Greene
wrote:
Simon:
Yeah, I misunderstood your previous mention of having it as a [fifth]
string argument. I somehow associated that automatically with the
"message" parameter (the only string argument, I suppose) but I also
noticed my mistake after
Simon:
Yeah, I misunderstood your previous mention of having it as a [fifth]
string argument. I somehow associated that automatically with the
"message" parameter (the only string argument, I suppose) but I also
noticed my mistake after I sent the email.
I personally am interested in adding the s
On Fri, 11 May 2012 11:24:20 +0100, Simon Pieters wrote:
It is not appropriate for choosing between low resolution and high
resolution, because the environment can change (e.g. the user might
fullscreen the video after it has begun loading, and want high
resolution). Also, bandwidth is n
On Fri, 11 May 2012 11:54:19 +0200, Philip Jägenstedt
wrote:
On Thu, 10 May 2012 23:03:15 +0200, Paul Adenot
wrote:
Currently implementing the media attribute of the source element in
Gecko, we are unsure about what the specification requires us to do
there.
Hixie has already replie
On Thu, 10 May 2012 23:03:15 +0200, Paul Adenot
wrote:
Currently implementing the media attribute of the source element in
Gecko, we are unsure about what the specification requires us to do
there.
Hixie has already replied, I just want to note that this is exactly what
has been implem
