DPR doesnt seem to have any effect
Reported by
mhmd...@gmail.com,
May 10 2016
|
||
Issue descriptionUserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/52.0.2723.2 Safari/537.36 Steps to reproduce the problem: 1. Open Devtool, responsive selected in the dropdown. 2. set pixels to 2048x1536 and DPR to 2 What is the expected behavior? Viewport size has to be 1024X768, as the DPR is set to 2. What went wrong? The device mode just sets the viewport to 2048x1536, completely ignoring DPR set to 2. Did this work before? Yes Sometime back in previous versions of chrome, also did confirm it did, looking at other posts related to this stuff on chrome forum Chrome version: 52.0.2723.2 Channel: canary OS Version: 6.1 (Windows 7, Windows Server 2008 R2) Flash Version: Shockwave Flash 22.0 r0 As seen in the attached file, the px are set to 2048x1536 with DPR set to 2, but as can be seen from the screenshot, the viewport is rendered for the pixel specified without considering the DPR.
,
May 11 2016
Take ipad1/2 and iPad3. They both have the same diagonal size (therefore same DIP/DP). iPad1/2 has a resolution 1024x768 with DPR 1. iPad3 has a resolution 2048x1536 with DPR 2. Now, in the device mode when i have these two devices. both of the settings have to render a window that is 1024x768. But that doesn't happen. (As i understand that is because the value specified is DIP and not the resolution) P.S: When i selected the iPad that has already been listed with chrome settings in the devices, I see the pixel values 1024x768 and DPR 2, also the widow rendered is 1024x768. So what I am asking here is, it will be helpful if the user has the option to specify either the resolution (physical pixels) or the DIP that is already available. Please let me know if I am missing something here and BTW you guys do great work!
,
May 11 2016
We made a specific decision to go with DIP, as that number is visible to the web page. I see where your confusion comes from, but I'd rather avoid having both physical _and_ DIP pixels, as it would be even more confusing. Maybe we should have an explanation somewhere (in the tooltip or the documentation) to emphasize this. I'll look into that.
,
May 11 2016
Thank you for the explanation. As almost all device spec sheets have the resolution (physical px) specified and not the DIP in px, I thought having the physical px would be straight forward.
,
Jul 15 2016
Issue 610432 has been merged into this issue. |
||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
||
Comment 1 by dgozman@chromium.org
, May 11 2016