[whatwg] Features for responsive Web design

Daniel Glazman daniel.glazman at disruptive-innovations.com
Wed May 16 06:58:51 PDT 2012

Le 15/05/12 09:28, Ian Hickson a écrit :

>     <img src="face-600-200 at 1.jpeg" alt=""
>          src-template="face-%w-%h@%r.jpeg"
>          src-versions="600x200x1 600x200x2 200x200x1">
> [snip]
>     <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       200w 200h">

Three comments:

1. from the point of view of an editor (I mean a wysiwyg application),
    this is far too complex and painful. With my BlueGriffon hat on,
    please trust me on that. Where is the harmony, the consistency with
    the multi-source video and audio elements? Why should browsers and
    editing tools have to deal with a different mechanism?

2. the %w and %h syntax above will clash with the necessary escaping of
    non-URL compliant characters and I think this is a _very_ bad idea.
    All examples I saw include filenames only but these are really URIs !

3. for the same reason, because some filesystems allow whitespaces and
    commas and more in filenames, the latter seems to me dangerous and
    certainly a bad idea. I know whitespaces in URIs will be encoded but
    decoding srcset will then imply parsing it to extract URIs before
    unescaping or whitespaces will become a problem. That's really too

It's much more subjective but I have an extra comment: the proposed
srcset attribute is absolutely ugly. I think the srcset approach is

W3C CSS Working Group, Co-chair

More information about the whatwg mailing list