[whatwg] Features for responsive Web design
ian at hixie.ch
Wed Oct 10 11:36:44 PDT 2012
On Wed, 10 Oct 2012, Tim Kadlec wrote:
> > That's actually exactly why it's better _not_ to plan for it. We can't
> > design features for problems we don't understand. It's better to wait
> > until we have real problems before fixing them.
> You may not be able to predict every future problem, but surely you need
> to keep it in mind as you create solutions for today, right?
Sure, that's why for example the srcset="" syntax is extensible and
already supports arbitrary densities, not just 1x and 2x.
> For example, if all it takes is one higher resolution or one more
> feature to come along before a solution becomes unwieldy doesn't that
> imply the solution isn't a particularly strong one and is instead merely
> a stopgap?
Only if we think that 3x is more likely to occur than not. It would be
easy to support everything we could think of, even the unlikely things,
but the cost would be that instead of a strong solution we'd have an
In the world of perpetual progress, every solution is "stopgap". That
doesn't mean they're not strong solutions in the meantime.
> We can't be too bold with our predictions, but we do have to build with
> the future in mind or else condemn ourselves to a perpetual game of
Standardisation is the process of taking innovative ideas and describing
them in an interoperably implementable way. Standardisation is by
definition a perpetual game of catch-up.
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg