A different way of looking at responsive design: Intention.js
1–10 of 55 posts
Re: A different way of looking at responsive design: Intention.js
#2I think this is absolutely incredible. This is exactly how I've always envisioned responsive design.
I'm really looking forward to the usual HN pessimistic discussion on why this is bad/wrong/could be done better. I know a lot of people don't like the negativity, but I really enjoy it because I get pumped up about stuff like this. WSJ is pretty reputable too.
MIT licesnse for everything Copyright (c) 2012 The Wall Street Journal, http://wsj.com/
Re: A different way of looking at responsive design: Intention.js
#3Ok, but its still client side which I don't like. You're making the mobile device download all this markup, and then utilize further CPU cycles to discard that markup. It should run server side.
Re: A different way of looking at responsive design: Intention.js
#4Ok, but its still client side which I don't like. You're making the mobile device download all this markup, and then utilize further CPU cycles to discard that markup. It should run server side.
So you'd have to refresh the page when you change phone orientation from portrait to landscape?
Re: A different way of looking at responsive design: Intention.js
#5Ok, but its still client side which I don't like. You're making the mobile device download all this markup, and then utilize further CPU cycles to discard that markup. It should run server side.
No. The entire purpose of responsive design is that it adapts to the client that is being used to view it.
Re: A different way of looking at responsive design: Intention.js
#6Ok, but its still client side which I don't like. You're making the mobile device download all this markup, and then utilize further CPU cycles to discard that markup. It should run server side.
So you'd have to refresh the page when you change phone orientation from portrait to landscape?
The server could just give the requesting device what it needs to display the content in both orientations. That doesn't necessitate also giving it the layout for 10 other possible screen sizes.
Re: A different way of looking at responsive design: Intention.js
#7I think this is absolutely incredible. This is exactly how I've always envisioned responsive design. I'm really looking forward to the usual HN pessimistic discussion on why this is bad/wrong/could be done better. I know a lot of people don't like the negativity, but I really enjoy it because I get pumped up about stuff like this. WSJ is pretty reputable too. MIT licesnse for everything Copyright (c) 2012 The Wall St…
My biggest complaints with it are that this mixes up content and presentation concerns again and we already have great tools for declarative responsive design. After however many years of working to get people to separate their content from their presentation, tools like this rush back in and encourage people to again start smashing them together. Being a Javascript tool, it also means that if a client doesn't run your JS for whatever reason, your entire site becomes rather unusable (you'll notice a lack of default/fallback classes and whatnot in the examples provided).
> Where should your advertising code get placed when you're on a desktop? Does the page require an alternate slideshow widget on touch enabled devices?
These are adaptive content concerns (the type of content served is adapted to fit the client, generally through progressive enhancement), rather than a responsive concerns (the content served is presented according to the client's metrics and capabilities). Completely valid use case here, IMO. Pitching it as an adaptive content library would be much nicer, because there actually is a need for good tools to do that well, whereas responsive content is basically fully handled by media queries and a tiny sprinkling of non-presentational Modernizr.
Re: A different way of looking at responsive design: Intention.js
#8Ok, but its still client side which I don't like. You're making the mobile device download all this markup, and then utilize further CPU cycles to discard that markup. It should run server side.
No. The entire purpose of responsive design is that it adapts to the client that is being used to view it.
Why can't this adaptation happen on the server? Client tells server what the resolution possibilities are ("the current browser size is X by Y, and my screen size (and thus maximum browser size) is W by Z), and server gives back only styles relevant to that size. On mobile devices where the browser is always fullscreen, that means a maximum of two layouts (horizontal, vertical).
Re: A different way of looking at responsive design: Intention.js
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. The entire purpose of responsive design is that it adapts to the client that is being used to view it.
Why can't this adaptation happen on the server? Client tells server what the resolution possibilities are ("the current browser size is X by Y, and my screen size (and thus maximum browser size) is W by Z), and server gives back only styles relevant to that size. On mobile devices where the browser is always fullscreen, that means a maximum of two layouts (horizontal, vertical).
Because clients don't send this information to the server (and if they did, its validity would be suspect), and because browser layout engines and CSS are already designed to be independent of specific device metrics. It's a solution to a problem that doesn't need solving.
Re: A different way of looking at responsive design: Intention.js
#10That's interesting, but I'd expect their website to actually use their own product appropriately when viewing from my mobile devices. The "examples" page works, but isn't really in a well designed format - font headings are too large, text is pushed all the way to the far left without a single pixel margin causing it to look like the page should scroll horizontally, etc...
I like the concept of what they're doing, but if their site is using it, then I'm not interested.