<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 8:14 AM, Ryosuke Niwa <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rniwa@webkit.org" target="_blank">rniwa@webkit.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">I do have the same concern over terse names. I don't see any point in saving 13 bytes by abbrebiating DevicePixelRadio as DPR.<div><br></div><div>In the case of ResourceWidth, we can't get this number until we trigger a layout. It doesn't seem desirable to slow down the page load speed by eagering triggering layout before loading each image. How do we plan to work around that?</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>The resource width is planned to be based on the `sizes` attribute when available, and to fall back to the viewport width when it is not.</div><div>There are no plans to delay image loading waiting for layout, nor are there current plans to use the layout information once we have it, as that would introduce undesired raciness. </div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><div><br></div><div><div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div class="h5">On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 10:59 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mjs@apple.com" target="_blank">mjs@apple.com</a>></span> wrote:<br></div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div class="h5"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div><br></div><div>Does anyone else in the WebKit community have comments on this proposal?<span><font color="#888888"><br><div><blockquote type="cite"></blockquote></div></font></span></div><span><font color="#888888"><div><br></div><div> - Maciej</div></font></span><div><div><br><div><blockquote type="cite"><div>On Apr 28, 2015, at 8:42 AM, Yoav Weiss <<a href="mailto:yoav@yoav.ws" target="_blank">yoav@yoav.ws</a>> wrote:</div><br><div><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote" style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><span>(Re) Posting Ilya's response from April 24th, since his response wasn't published on the mailing list archive for some reason.</span></div><div class="gmail_quote" style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><span><br></span></div><div class="gmail_quote" style="font-size:12.8000001907349px"><span>On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Yoav Weiss <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:yoav@yoav.ws" target="_blank">yoav@yoav.ws</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">+Ilya for spec related questions.<div><br></div><div>Also, I forgot to mention it, but my intention is to implement the RW and DPR hints first, and see about the MD and RQ hints (which are newer to the spec) later on.<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>Yes, we should scope this discussion to RW and DPR. This is consistent with Blink implementation [1], and to keep this thread focused I'll skip the comments on MD/RQ/etc. That said, happy to discuss those in a separate thread :)</div><div> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><span>On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mjs@apple.com" target="_blank">mjs@apple.com</a>></span> wrote:</span><span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><blockquote type="cite"><div style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;line-height:14px">Is the Internet-Draft for this planned to become a standards-track RFC? Is there an IETF Working Group that has adopted it?</div></blockquote></div></blockquote></span></div></div></div></blockquote><div>Yes, and as part of the HTTP WG. /cc mnot</div><span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><blockquote type="cite"><div style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;line-height:14px">On the spec contents: I’m wary of the fact that the header names are very opaque. That’s not in the HTTP tradition, where header names are generally human-readable. I am skeptical that the HTTP WG would be satisfied with these header names as-is.</div></blockquote></div></blockquote><div>I believe the intent with the short names was to minimize impact on the network, since the headers will be sent with every sub-resource requests once the server has opted-in. With that said, you're not the first to make that comment, so I'm open to modify that, especially since HTTP/2 makes this consideration irrelevant.</div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>Uncompressed bytes on the wire add up quickly and short names are consistent with general policy of keeping those at a minimum. I don't believe this is counter to HTTP WG goals or guidance. That said, I'm not opposed to renaming them if there is a strong preference one way or another.</div><span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><blockquote type="cite"><div style="font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;line-height:14px">I know spec feedback may be off-topic for an implementation thread, but I’m not sure where else to send it since it’s not clear if this Internet-Draft is associated with a working group.</div></blockquote></div></blockquote><div>Spec feedback is most welcome. The best place to send it is <a href="https://github.com/igrigorik/http-client-hints/issues" target="_blank">the GitHub repo</a>. </div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>Big +1 to that. This is all great feedback, thanks Maciej.</div><div><br></div><div>ig</div><div> </div></div><div style="font-size:12.8000001907349px">[1] <a href="https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msg/blink-dev/vOgv-TqefsA/o_fEsy8RFcwJ" target="_blank">https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msg/blink-dev/vOgv-TqefsA/o_fEsy8RFcwJ</a></div></div></div>
</div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div><br></div></div>_______________________________________________<br>
webkit-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org" target="_blank">webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>