On 07.11.2006, at 19:49, Shadow2531 wrote:
On 11/7/06, Anne van Kesteren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I thought the proposal was that only that (setting height and
width to the
intrinsic size of the image) would be conforming, but that
rendering would
still be the same.
[encouraged if you need to resize the image - alt]
<img src="276x110.png" style="width: 50%; height: 50%;" width="276"
height="110" alt="fallback text" title="description">
If that's correct, doing things the proposed, encouraged, conforming
way seems fine as far as UAs that support css are concerned.
Don't forget that percentage values are relative values. And in
current browser implementations, setting those values via CSS-rules
or using width- and height-attributes are leading to different
results! It's due to different parents to calculate actual (pixel)
values from!
CSS values are relative to the the parent element in HTML tree:
<div style="width: 100px; height: 100px;">
<img src="276x110.png" style="width: 50%; height: 50%;">
</div>
=> displays image 50x50px.
Attributes values are relative to the actual size of the image:
<img src="276x110.png" width="50%" height="50%">
=> displays image 138x55px.
That may be very useful in many cases, so as a HTML-coder, I don't
think anybody should change that behavior without proposing something
to replace it.
--
Andreyka Lechev
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
