On Oct 14, 2007, at 2:03 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
...
I don't think "If both attributes are specified, then the ratio of the
specified width to the specified height must be the same as the ratio
of the logical width to the logical height in the image file." solves
any real problem given what browsers already have to implement, so I'd
remove that sentence.
...
As a real-world example, Launchpad currently stretches the width of
static images to produce simple bar charts of how much particular
software packages have been localized.
<https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu>
We have to specify both width= and height= for the images, because
specifying width= alone causes w3m to stretch the images vertically to
maintain their aspect ratio. Meanwhile, elsewhere we're using <canvas>,
so we should really be declaring our pages to be HTML 5 site-wide.
The sentence Henri quoted would require us to choose between
server-side generation of every chart image, incompatibility with w3m,
or non-conformance with any HTML specification. I know w3m isn't
exactly a major browser, but I don't see any good reason for having to
make that choice.
Cheers
--
Matthew Paul Thomas
http://mpt.net.nz/
