25585 2014-05-06 21:35:55 +0000 <img> Remove this section and the "Adaptive images" section and pull in https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ResponsiveImagesCG/picture-element/gh-pages/source 2014-08-06 15:00:12 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified WHATWG HTML unspecified Other other RESOLVED FIXED http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#the-img-element P3 normal Unsorted 1 contributor ian e ian mike zcorpan contributor oldest_to_newest 105243 0 contributor 2014-05-06 21:35:55 +0000 Specification: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/edits.html Multipage: http://www.whatwg.org/C#the-img-element Complete: http://www.whatwg.org/c#the-img-element Referrer: Comment: <img> Remove this section and the "Adaptive images" section and pull in https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ResponsiveImagesCG/picture-element/gh-pages/ source Posted from: 2a00:801:e0:30:6c68:b2bc:f230:3715 User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_9_2) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/34.0.1847.116 Safari/537.36 OPR/21.0.1432.48 (Edition Next) 105352 1 ian 2014-05-07 21:28:16 +0000 Can you do me a favour and replace the copyright symbol with a (c) symbol? My pipeline isn't UTF-8 safe yet and so I have some early filtering in place that drops everything if it detects a high bit set. (Hopefully my upcoming changes will fix this, but I'm not there yet.) 105358 2 ian 2014-05-07 21:57:13 +0000 BTW, please take a look at the bugs with <img> in their summary, and take any of them that you're planning on working on. I'll move the others to a far future milestone for now, at which point we can see how much the ongoing <picture> maintenance cost is and figure out next steps. 105401 3 zcorpan 2014-05-08 07:21:26 +0000 http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=8611&to=8612 Still need to remove the "Adaptive images" section. Fixed (c). I've taken the bugs that affect the integration. The other bugs are lower priority for me, but I can take them later also. Should we create a new bugzilla component for <img> and have the spec's bug filer pick that for bugs in that section? 105470 4 ian 2014-05-08 18:15:44 +0000 I've commented out the Adaptive images section. I'd love to see that exact section unchanged but with the examples switched to the new syntax, though. 109711 5 ian 2014-07-31 21:16:01 +0000 zcorpan, are you planning on resurrecting that section in the new world? 109922 6 zcorpan 2014-08-05 10:03:54 +0000 https://github.com/ResponsiveImagesCG/picture-element/commit/be59932c68600fed2ef9ca0ccd0565d28896ce4f 109943 7 ian 2014-08-05 18:05:33 +0000 Is that really what authors prefer?! Those are examples are all ten times more verbose and have dozens more possible ways of making mistakes. 109996 8 e 2014-08-06 15:00:12 +0000 The last three examples in this section all address one of the criticisms originally levied against old-srcset: that by short-handing media queries – reducing them to a number and a signifier which effectively resolve to something like a max-width or max-height query – old-srcset prevented the min-width-based, “mobile-first” pattern many authors had adopted in their CSS media queries. [1] The section, as originally written, shows that that criticism is baseless. Old-srcset can be used with that pattern. But frankly, the new syntax, by simply *just using media queries* which authors are already familiar with, is *so* much simpler from an education standpoint that this section doesn't merit inclusion anymore. Because we're just using media queries, *of course* we can adopt either desktop-first or mobile-first patterns. *Of course* we can use either min-widths or max-widths. And we can do these things using the sort of code we’re already writing in our CSS... *without* having to put our minimum queries on a different source (!); *without* having to remember that by assigning a density descriptor without w/h the image is treated as suitable for a viewport of infinite dimensions (!). Full media queries, unlike old-srcset, are obvious. Old-srcset was terser and provided tighter constraints on what authors could and couldn't do. But it presented a much steeper learning curve. So of course authors prefer `picture`. [1] http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2012-May/290211.html