Jump to content
Itâ€™s funny how this article feels like it jumps into the middle of a conversation from two directions.
From one direction, it seems like it jumps into the middle of the responsive images conversation without context. On the other, it has become clear to me that it is a piece of broader thinking that Paul articulated in his A List Apart article and his follow up blog post
I think you need to read Paulâ€™s ALA article and follow up post to really understand what Paul is getting at here. They are interesting food for thought. I find the general concepts in the Web Aesthetic appealing.
At the risk of picking nits, I wanted to make a couple of points on a few of the details in the article.
Under #2, the use case for art direction isnâ€™t solely cropping of images. The Meego Browser example in the use cases document shows a video of how an image changes entirely as the page reflows.
For #3, I concur. I wrote a bit about this problem when looking at what would happen if we actually had a new image format. Like most of these issues, it comes down to a battle between the lookahead pre-parser and web developer convenience. Browser makers argue that the lookahead pre-parser is an essential user feature (making things faster). And users > web developers > browser makers.
Regarding #4, this is in fact what the RICG is doing a lot of. Prototyping work. Defining use cases. Seeing what works and what doesnâ€™t. Creating polyfills. Testing them.
The way I look at it is the best thing we can do to make sure a solution is found is to keep pressing forward with solutions that people can test, use, improve or bitch about.
If weâ€™re really lucky, what weâ€™re doing will cause someone to say, â€œOMG, why are they doing it that why? This would be much better. Iâ€™m going to go code it up to show them.â€
That would be awesome! By continuing to push the standards process, we keep the fires stoked and increase the likelihood that we find a solution.