W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > March 2007

[whatwg] require img dimensions to be correct?

From: Thomas Broyer <t.broyer@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 09:14:43 +0100
Message-ID: <a9699fd20703210114w5e46f1cfkfdee5a745ddfa5d4@mail.gmail.com>
2007/3/21, Nicholas Shanks:
> On 17 Mar 2007, at 23:28, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
>
> > I think that in most cases will be better if we could package
> > complex pages into zip envelopes and deliver them in the whole.
> > That would be real solution of "jumps".  And <img width=...
> > height=...> is a palliative.
>
> I have an open bug with Safari requesting support for the multipart/
> mixed Content-Type. This would provide the "ziped" content you
> request (and you can use a Transfer-Encoding to compress it before
> sending)

In this particular case, multipart/related would be more appropriate.
See http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/MHTML
If you talked about serving the images in a multipart/* envelope,
multipart/alternate is more appropriate than multipart/mixed.
But, hey, RFC2046 states (?5.1.3) that ? Any "multipart" subtypes that
an implementation does not recognize must be treated as being of
subtype "mixed" ?, so in terms of client implementations, supporting
multipart/mixed might be enough.

-- 
Thomas Broyer
Received on Wednesday, 21 March 2007 01:14:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:53 UTC