Re: non-rectangular images & <img> tag

On 4/24/07 9:53 AM, "Olivier GENDRIN" <> wrote:

> On 4/23/07, Dailey, David P. <> wrote:
>> So I guess the question is how well does <img> hold up when both the image
>> and the display device are non-rectangular.
> This is a very interesting question. I still had to handle non
> rectangular effects in some designs, and a way to render
> non-rectangular image would have been usefull (and would have avoided
> a lot of z-index layers). We can found some turn around method, that
> use a lot (a *lot*) of floated div (ex :
>, but we could
> imagine to allow image to have a shape/coords attributes (like
> image-map) : the elements outside of the shape would not be rendered,
> and the UA will allow content to be displayed there (or to be clicked
> by the mouse : the transparent image over a link is a nightmare).
> We could have that code : <img
> src="" alt="" width="100"
> height="100" shape="circle" coords="50%,50%,50%"/>. I allows elegant
> degradation as far as the old UA will ignore shape and coords, and use
> width and height.
> But perhaps this should be done on the CSS side, as far it's a
> presentational issue...

I and many others people in various blogs/forums have expressed this desire.
I think it should be css based and optionally allow an svg file to server as
a sort of 'clipping path' to define the area.

Like the concept of 'clipping paths' there are dozens of other DTP concepts
that really should have  made their way into the web design world years ago.

::   thyme online ltd
::   po box cb13650  nassau  the bahamas
::   website:
::   tel: 242 327-1864  fax: 242 377 1038

Received on Thursday, 26 April 2007 19:06:53 UTC