W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > May 1998

RE: Are IMG height/width deprecated? Why not?

From: Dmitry Beransky <dberansky@ucsd.edu>
Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 10:52:24 -0700
Message-Id: <v0311070db187773342b5@[]>
To: www-style@w3.org
So if I follow this correctly... Let's say I have a 640x480 image which I
want to display as a thumbnail at 40x30 (for argument's sake, let's say I
don't want to make a smaller copy).  The correct markup would be:

<IMG src="some.img" alt="Some picture of something." height="480"
width="640 style="height: 30px; width:40px;">

Right?  But wouldn't this break backward compatibility with non-CSS
compliant browsers.  Rendered by such a browser, the image will be 16x

Dmitry Beransky

>I believe the term used for this is "intrinsic dimension".  It is a simple
>physical description of the image.  It is explained in the CSS2 specs in
>various locations.
>There is a difference if you interpret it carefully.  Images are, typically,
>a fixed size and that is necessary information to insert the image.  The UA
>can get this information from the image itself, of course.  But, for many
>reasons it seems like a generally good idea to include this information in
>the markup itself.  (For a good source of reasons look around the
>accessibility areas of the W3C web.)  The height and width attributes are
>not for specifying what the height and width should be.  They are for
>specifying what the height and width are, thus part of the description of
>the image.  Such as alt, longdesc, etc.
>For instance:
>You have a 200px X 200px image and want to resize it to 300px X 300px in the
>UA for some reason. (Note: The way the CSS2 spec reads, the UA may scale the
>image to fit the content-width box.  The use of "may" implies that this
>could depend on the UA or the UA's current display mode.)
>Incorrect markup:
><IMG src="some.img" alt="Some picture of something." height="300"
>(The image should render at 200px X 200px, even though it is stated as
>Correct markup:
><IMG src="some.img" alt="Some picture of something." height="200"
>width="200" style="height: 300px; width:300px;">
>(The image, or at least its containment box, should render at 300px X 300px)
>,David Norris
>World Wide Web - http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1652/
>Illusionary Web - http://illusionary.dyn.ml.org/ <-- 02:00 - 10:00 GMT
>Video/Audio Phone - callto:illusionary.dyn.ml.org
>Page via mail - 412039@pager.mirabilis.com
>ICQ Universal Internet Number - 412039
>E-Mail - kg9ae@geocities.com
>-----Original Message-----
>From: www-html-request@w3.org [mailto:www-html-request@w3.org]On Behalf
>Of Ian Hickson
>Sent: Saturday, May 16, 1998 5:05 PM
>To: www-html@w3.org
>Subject: Are IMG height/width deprecated? Why not?
>Nic Hughes (on the ciwah group) pointed out to me that the 'height' and
>'width' attributes are NOT deprecated (in HTML4) according to the attribute
>index. However, it seems to me that according to section 13.7 they *are*:
>>>13.7 Visual presentation of images, objects, and applets
>>>All IMG and OBJECT attributes that concern visual alignment
>>>and presentation have been deprecated in favor of style sheets.
>>>13.7.1 Width and height
>Since 'height' and 'width' on IMG are "override" heights and widths, they
>certainly seem like "attributes that concern ... presentation". The
>attributes are also present in the DTD.
>Is this an error in the DTD & attribute index (please say that it is!) or an
>error in the text? CSS has been able to
>specifiy height/width since the early CSS1 days, IMHO there is no reason for
>height and width to stay.
>[Note: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/html40-updates/html40-errata.html states
>that the width attribute on PRE *has* been deprecated, as does the DTD. It
>does not mention IMG's width/height attributes. Other IMG attributes, e.g.
>vspace, are listed as deprecated in the attribute index.]
>Ian Hickson
>Version: 3.12   Info: www.geekcode.com
>GIT/M/S d->-- s+: a--->? C++(+++)>$ U>*++++ P L+>+++++ E(+)>+++ W+++ N(+) o?
>K? w@ O- !M V- PS+ PE- Y+ PGP>+ t 5+++>++++ X- R+(+++) tv b++(+++) DI++
>D++(---)>++++ G>+++ e(*)>+++++ h!()(--) !r y?
>------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Received on Tuesday, 19 May 1998 13:53:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:26:47 UTC