Re: IMG tag doesn't seem to support relative HEI & WID values as standard

Mark D. Wood (mdw@itc.kodak.com)
Thu, 04 Sep 1997 16:13:58 -0400


Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19970904161358.00a2d2f0@mailroom.itc.kodak.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 1997 16:13:58 -0400
To: Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>, "Mark D. Wood" <mdw@itc.kodak.com>
From: "Mark D. Wood" <mdw@itc.kodak.com>
Cc: www-html@w3.org
In-Reply-To: <Pine.WNT.3.95.970904070410.-236871F-100000@hazel.corp.adob
Subject: Re: IMG tag doesn't seem to support relative HEI & WID values   as   standard

At 07:07 AM 9/4/97 -0400, Dave Raggett wrote:
>On Tue, 2 Sep 1997, Mark D. Wood wrote:
>
>> Why doesn't the HTML4.0 spec support percentages for the height &
>> width attributes to the IMG tag?  As I understand the spec (I've
>> reproduced the relevant portions below), the values for the HEI
>> and WID attributes must be expressed as absolute pixels. 
>
>Current browsers don't support % units on IMG for width
>and height. Furthermore its not clear what these would
>mean. % for width is meaningful, but what about height?

MSIE & Netscape both *do* support %units on IMG HEI & WID tags and have for
some time.   The percentages are of the window height and width. As an
aside, MS & Netscape don't handle the percentages in completely identical
manners---they do different things if both are specified, which is another
argument for a standard here.

>In any case, there is no agreement to focus on using
>style sheets to control presentation rather than extending
>further the presentation attributes in HTML.

I can buy this argument, although I'm not sure that I completely like it.

-Mark Wood