[whatwg] Features for responsive Web design

[Ian Hickson]

On Thu, 11 Oct 2012, Mark Callow wrote:
> On 2012/10/10 12:29, Ian Hickson wrote:
> > On Wed, 10 Oct 2012, Mark Callow wrote:
> >> I don't know what the browser on the SH-10D is doing, (It's running 
> >> Android 4.0) but, given the physical size (4.5"), if they were making 
> >> the css pixels smaller, the content would be unreadable. I expect 
> >> they are actually using 3x.
> >
> > Can you obtain a screenshot of this page in the device's browser?
> >
> >    http://junkyard.damowmow.com/513
> >
> > (Should be power+voldown to get a screen shot.)
> 
> I don't have one of these phones. I went to the Docomo shop on the way 
> home yesterday and was able to view the page on it but could not get or 
> send a screenshot.

Thanks for trying!


> The size of the black rectangle relative to the cats image looks 
> slightly smaller than on my PC and I'd say the right edge of it is 
> further to the left of the image than on my PC but overall the result is 
> broadly similar.

The ratio of the box to the image shouldn't change, what matters is the 
number of pixels in the screenshot that are used to actualy drow the box.


> Regular text on web pages is very small. It really isn't practical to 
> read it without zooming in. So I suspect they are using 2x thus making 
> CSS pixels smaller. There's probably a certain amount of chicken & egg 
> here. How much content would break on devices with a 3:1 device:css 
> ratio? That concern probably stops device makers setting 3x even when 
> they really should.

There's no compatibility risk with changing the density ratio; the only 
risk is that images on pages look a bit more fuzzy, but that happens with 
2x anyway, so moving to 3x doesn't affect that.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'