W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > July 2008

Re: Image intrinsic aspect ratio and replaced element box aspect ratio

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 02:11:10 +0000 (UTC)
To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0807300148170.29977@hixie.dreamhostps.com>

On Wed, 10 Oct 2007, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> 
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/#height
> > 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.
> 
> Why is this requirement useful? As far as I can tell, it isn't required 
> for interop and makes an interoperably implemented feature 
> non-conforming for no good reason.

Having the validator point out when an image is being stretch to unnatural 
dimensions is helpful.


> Moreover, it makes the conformance of the markup document dependent on 
> external resource representations, which complicates things a lot and 
> makes markup conformance a concept that you can't observe from the 
> markup itself alone.

There are many problems that can affect an author, they're not limited to 
just the content of the page. The conformance of the CSS files, the JS 
files, the PNG files, the conformance of all the HTTP headers, the 
relationships between those various element, etc. I'd expect a validator 
to check all these things. :-)

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 30 July 2008 02:11:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:19 GMT