it to the right persons or tell
me where to ask for such feature-requests?
Thanks,
-Anselm
-
Anselm Hannemann
@helloanselm
On 12.11.2013, at 09:11, Adam Barth w...@adambarth.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 12:08 AM, Jukka K. Korpela jkorp...@cs.tut.fi wrote:
2013-11-12 9:58, Adam Barth wrote:
Unfortunately, we can't add new tags to head. If the parser sees a
tag it doesn't recognize in the head, it creates a
On 12.11.2013, at 09:08, Jukka K. Korpela jkorp...@cs.tut.fi wrote:
2013-11-12 9:58, Adam Barth wrote:
Unfortunately, we can't add new tags to head. If the parser sees a
tag it doesn't recognize in the head, it creates a fake body tag and
pushes the tag down into the body.
But you could
Really? An empty div element? What about accessibility or When CSS cannot be
loaded? What if only html is grabbed by another page? It doesn't seem to be a
really solid solution in my opinion.
Anselm
On 12 Nov 2013, at 19:40, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 12,
On 09.11.2013, at 11:49, Markus Lanthaler markus.lantha...@gmx.net wrote:
On Saturday, November 09, 2013 12:53 AM, Bruno Racineux wrote:
On 11/8/13 10:46 AM, Rafael Rinaldi rafael.rina...@gmail.com wrote:
It looks complex because it tries to solve something complex. I think
there¹s no way
Am 13.08.2013 um 23:10 schrieb Edward O'Connor eocon...@apple.com:
Hi Anselm,
You wrote:
[A]s WebKit today implemented the srcset attribute [1] according to
the W3C specification [2] I do think it is time to update the WHATWG
specification [3] reflecting the syntax as written in W3C's
On Friday, 14. December 2012 at 08:52, Karl Dubost wrote:
Le 14 déc. 2012 à 17:51, Stan a écrit :
If most of the users do this right now, it does not mean they are happy
with this,
it doesn't mean they are unhappy about it. Or more exactly that a fraction of
them can even look
Am Donnerstag, 18. Oktober 2012 um 04:05 schrieb Fred Andrews:
This is good point. Could I just clarify my understanding with an example:
Given a thumbnail image with srcset:
srcset=low.jpg 20w, hi.jpg 40w, huge.jpg 80w
The webpage may want to have the browser scale the 20w image to say
Am 26.06.2012 um 15:52 schrieb Boris Zbarsky:
On 6/26/12 4:41 AM, Oscar Otero wrote:
I understand the problem. Sending only the window dimmensions, screen
resolution and other useful information available in media-queries can be
enought. For example:
Viewport: width=1024px; height=768px;
Am 01.06.2012 um 20:24 schrieb Kornel Lesiński:
On 1 cze 2012, at 00:58, Anselm Hannemann Web Development
i...@anselm-hannemann.com wrote:
• Improved alternative text — allows structured fallback, avoids
duplication.
This is where I do not agree. If you use MQ style with source you have
Am 01.06.2012 um 21:01 schrieb Julian Reschke:
On 2012-06-01 20:24, Kornel Lesiński wrote:
...
If there are commas or backslashes in the URL they must be escaped with
`\`.
This is another problem why I would separate the diff. srces.
Escaping an URL is not something that should be
Am 01.06.2012 um 21:19 schrieb Aaron Gustafson:
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 3:05 PM, whatwg-requ...@lists.whatwg.org wrote:
Why won't you do this with separate attributes?
Of course this is much shorter to write but it confuses the masses of
developers because this is not a familiar
Am 01.06.2012 um 07:33 schrieb Kornel Lesiński:
Here's a bit of a kitchen sink solution with ideas that floated around.
• I've used media queries for the art-directed use-cases, because: viewport
size descriptors of srcset are confusing, limited (e.g. you can't have
separate image only
Am 16.05.2012 um 09:13 schrieb Tab Atkins Jr.:
I've been doing a lot of work today correcting misconceptions about
the Responsive Images proposal that Hixie put into the spec today. I
was pretty astonished at how much misinformation was flying around;
what's worse, this sort of misinformation
Even i took the draft wrong and I would count me as advanced dev.
How in world should a normal dev do this correct?
Anselm
Am 16.05.2012 um 17:05 schrieb Matthew Wilcox m...@matthewwilcox.com:
I kinda like the
syntax in the spec draft, it's short and sweet. And obvious when you
know.
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
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;
The good thing on the picture element is that we have the possibility to serve
other image-crops and with that the meaning could change so we could update the
alt-attribute in the tag for every source-element.
I do know this is a very special case but valid: An image displayed for a
desktop
Am 08.02.2012 um 10:43 schrieb Bronislav Klučka:
On 8.2.2012 10:18, David Goss wrote:
On 8 February 2012 07:42, Anselm Hannemannans...@novolo.de wrote:
I'd love to have *ability* (just for future use-cases which might come up
and I already would have some for tablet-devices and smartphones)
but this
would target all html-elements having alt-attributes.
Am 08.02.2012 um 11:18 schrieb Kornel Lesiński:
On 8 lut 2012, at 07:14, Anselm Hannemann ans...@novolo.de wrote:
picture alt=alternative text src=default.jpg
source href=large.jpg media=min-width:700px /
img alt=alternative text src
Ashley,
so you think about the img element attributes like I proposed?
img src=myimage_xs.jpg media-xs=(min-device-width:320px and
max-device-width:640px) media-src-xs=myimage_xs.jpg
media-m=(min-device-width:640px and max-device-width:1024px)
media-src-m=myimage_m.jpg
Am 07.02.2012 um 11:16 schrieb Matthew Wilcox:
2012/2/7 Anselm Hannemann – Novolo Designagentur ans...@novolo.de
Ashley,
so you think about the img element attributes like I proposed?
img src=myimage_xs.jpg media-xs=(min-device-width:320px and
max-device-width:640px) media-src-xs
browsers wouldn't load the src elements and would only load
the img
Right?
On 7 February 2012 10:31, Anselm Hannemann ans...@novolo.de wrote:
Am 07.02.2012 um 11:16 schrieb Matthew Wilcox:
2012/2/7 Anselm Hannemann – Novolo Designagentur ans...@novolo.de
Ashley,
so you think about
Am 08.02.2012 um 01:54 schrieb Kornel Lesiński:
On Tue, 07 Feb 2012 14:49:16 -, David Goss dvdg...@gmail.com wrote:
I guess I've moved away from similarities with video, in that I've
been thinking of the img as the default content, not the fallback
content. Going with your angle for a
Am 08.02.2012 um 08:23 schrieb Tab Atkins Jr.:
2012/2/7 Anselm Hannemann ans...@novolo.de:
Am 08.02.2012 um 01:54 schrieb Kornel Lesiński:
On Tue, 07 Feb 2012 14:49:16 -, David Goss dvdg...@gmail.com wrote:
I guess I've moved away from similarities with video, in that I've
been
Irakli,
I think it is not about markup vs server-side-solution. Server-side is not a
solution at all I think.
But it's about wether it's markup based (which means we also could serve
different content in images on different resolutions which would be a feature!)
or file-based as responsive
shot not showing all the detail, etc).
Yes already happening with background images with not text alt at all. So
let's say it is progress.
Le 6 sept. 2011 à 09:07, Anselm Hannemann - Novolo Designagentur a écrit :
by the way, how should we work with your solution, Karl, and a CMS or CSS
Am 06.09.2011 um 08:36 schrieb Ashley Sheridan:
On Tue, 2011-09-06 at 07:15 +0200, Karl Dubost wrote:
Le 5 sept. 2011 à 15:07, Anselm Hannemann - Novolo Designagentur a écrit :
Why should we use inline-styles once again? Why should we load content
images with CSS? What about
Am 31.08.2011 um 23:32 schrieb Karl Dubost:
Anselm,
(setting reply-to on www-style)
Seen this today, to remind people that it is not just
something up in the air. People need it.
http://www.webmonkey.com/2011/08/speed-up-your-responsive-designs-with-adaptive-images/
I wonder if it
Am 01.09.2011 um 01:46 schrieb Charles Pritchard:
On 8/31/2011 2:32 PM, Karl Dubost wrote:
Oh, that's not my proposal, that syntax was brought up by Tab Atkins.
It's already available. I was looking into how to handle img [no source]
style=background: url(..) /
It may work with the
Hi all,
Paul Irish said I should mention my problems here. So I will:
As we now have the possibility of creating fluid and responsive layouts in
several ways we have a problem with images.
There's currently no good feature to implement something like responsive images
which adapt to the
32 matches
Mail list logo
