- From: Murray Altheim <murray.altheim@nttc.edu>
- Date: Wed, 5 Jul 1995 13:24:32 -0400
- To: www-html@www10.w3.org
- Cc: lilley@afs.mcc.ac.uk
>Mike Batchelor said: > >> Walter Ian Kaye once wrote... >> > You could choose an arbitrary page size, but that would be making many >> > assumptions. At least be sure no graphic is wider than 470 pixels, because >> > that is the standard imaging area width for Netscape and Mosaic browsers >> > when used on screens 640 pixels wide. Anyone with a 512-pixel wide screen >> > or smaller would get the wrong size, although they're probably used to it >> > already. ;) > >You should either apply your "no bigger than" argument rigorously - and I bet >someone could find a platform somewhere with a narrower screen width than >512 pixels - or apply your "probably used to it" argument to 640 pixels... I hate to jump into this fray with a minor point, but screen size isn't the issue here. It's window size, and users can resize their browser windows as small as they like. I certainly don't open mine to full screen width all the time, and it certainly has been narrower than 512 pixels at times. HTML should remain browser and platform independent. There, I've said it. While style sheets may hint, any assumptions whatsoever about the browser or platform are bound to run into difficulties. I for one am VERY glad that we have hard-of-sight and blind constituents, as serving their needs will keep us on track. A strange angle possibly, but valuable. (I *try* to remember the ALT attributes on my IMG elements.) Murray __________________________________________________________________ Murray M. Altheim, Information Systems Analyst National Technology Transfer Center, Wheeling, West Virginia email: murray.altheim@nttc.edu www: http://ogopogo.nttc.edu/people/maltheim/maltheim.html
Received on Wednesday, 5 July 1995 13:25:01 UTC