Closed
Bug 936481
Opened 11 years ago
Closed 10 years ago
Implement `src-n` attribute on img element
Categories
(Core :: DOM: Core & HTML, defect)
Core
DOM: Core & HTML
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
WONTFIX
People
(Reporter: marcosc, Unassigned)
References
()
Details
The RespImg Syntax [1] introduces a new "src-n" attribute set on the img element that accepts a small set of microsyntaxes. These microsyntaxes address the viewport-based selection, device-pixel-ratio-based selection, and art direction use cases described in this document. The proposal claims to avoid the implementer concerns associated with the `picture` element proposal and supersedes the `srcset` syntax. [1] http://tabatkins.github.io/specs/respimg/Overview.html
Updated•11 years ago
|
Status: NEW → UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed: false
Reporter | ||
Updated•11 years ago
|
Updated•11 years ago
|
Keywords: dev-doc-needed
Comment 2•10 years ago
|
||
This spec was deprecated. It's back to srcset. http://picture.responsiveimages.org/
Comment 3•10 years ago
|
||
Current target is implementing srcset and picture
Updated•10 years ago
|
Keywords: dev-doc-needed
Comment 4•10 years ago
|
||
Taking the liberty to re-add dev-doc-needed. Firefox and other implementors deciding to implement some solutions and not others to solve the "responsive image" problem is worth documenting. The information of the why-s is scattered over implementors and standards mailing-lists, but it'd be good to have a documentation summarizing all that. Feel free to remove it again if you disagree or think this belongs somewhere else (like in its own doc bug)
Keywords: dev-doc-needed
Updated•10 years ago
|
Keywords: dev-doc-needed
Comment 5•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to David Bruant from comment #4) > Taking the liberty to re-add dev-doc-needed. Firefox and other implementors > deciding to implement some solutions and not others to solve the "responsive > image" problem is worth documenting. The information of the why-s is > scattered over implementors and standards mailing-lists, but it'd be good to > have a documentation summarizing all that. > Feel free to remove it again if you disagree or think this belongs somewhere > else (like in its own doc bug) It's already set at bug 870021.
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•