- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 03:07:16 +0000 (UTC)
On Sat, 13 Oct 2007, Henri Sivonen wrote: > On Oct 13, 2007, at 01:55, Ian Hickson wrote: > > On Tue, 7 Nov 2006, Henri Sivonen wrote: > > > So I think width and height should not have conformance requirements > > > tied to pixel dimensions of the references image file. They are > > > presentational, but they are such a useful presentational > > > optimization that I think it doesn't make sense to try the get rid > > > of that presentationalism just to comply with a principle. > > > > Is the compromise in the spec today acceptable? > > I don't think "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." solves any > real problem given what browsers already have to implement, so I'd > remove that sentence. It solves the problem of authors not being informed when they give the wrong dimensions by mistake and end up screwing up the ratio. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 29 July 2008 20:07:16 UTC