Is there really any reason to have it either place? Isn't it just extra
code that doesn't have to be there?
On Aug 12, 2004, at 6:29 PM, Joshua Street wrote:
Well, the W3C validation page recommends using either!
Demonstrating valid CSS:
<p>
<a href="http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/";>
<img style="border:0;width:88px;height:31px"
src="http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/images/vcss";
alt="Valid CSS!" />
</a>
</p>
Demonstrating valid XHTML:
<p>
<a href="http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=referer";><img
src="http://www.w3.org/Icons/valid-xhtml10";
alt="Valid XHTML 1.0!" height="31" width="88" /></a>
</p>
Personally, I'd go the CSS, but it doesn't really matter... (I don't
think)
Joshua Street
base10solutions
http://www.base10solutions.com/
-----Original Message-----
From: Edd Hale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Fri 13-Aug-04 9:59 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Subject: [WSG] Image size--where should it be?
I am new to CSS and I am not sure if the image size (width and height)
should appear in the HTML or be handled by CSS. Thank you.
Edd
<winmail.dat>
******************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
Proud presenters of Web Essentials 04 http://we04.com/
Web standards, accessibility, inspiration, knowledge
To be held in Sydney, September 30 and October 1, 2004
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************
