So I think I wasn't wrong about the agreement. Apparently, I used the wrong method to apply it though :(
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 6:26 AM, Brion Vibber brion@wikimedia.org wrote:
Simetrical wrote:
On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 5:59 PM, Huji huji.huji@gmail.com wrote:
I had my own reasonings in support of stopping images less than
120*120 to
scale up. Duesentrieb materialized my idea in few words excellently
while we
were chatting over IRC: "scaling up generally doesn't make sense.
maybe it
would be nice to be able to force it in some cases, not sure. if that
should
be allowed, it might be best to leave it to the client". If you ever
use a
slow internet connection and browse one of the galleries of small
icons on
Commons, you will notice how page load is extended merely because the
images
are being downloaded in a larger (in KB) scaled-up (thus no more nice looking) sizes.
Generally we don't rely on client-side scaling, because in many cases it's awful in quality.
Scaling up (eg when requested explicitly) is always left to the client, as:
a) it's going to look awful anyway ;)
b) no sense making, storing, and transferring a larger image
-- brion
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l