- From: Markku Savela <msa@anise.tte.vtt.fi>
- Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 16:26:04 +0200 (EET)
- To: www-html@w3.org
> We do? There are good reasons _against_ using dimensions for regular > images especially if they are small. See > http://www.hut.fi/u/jkorpela/html/alt.html Above refers Especially for small images, such as navigational icons and spacers, it is best to omit the WIDTH and HEIGHT attributes. The reason is that many graphic browsers reserve space according to them even when images are off; and this implies that the ALT texts don't fit. In my view, those brosers are broken: if images are off, the ALT text should be inserted into the text flow as is (like Lynx does), and size ignored. It's very sad that both major browser are broken in this respect(and in many others too). And now that I opened my gripes, I guess I may say that HTML is also going into wrong direction :-). An example of a thing I don't like/understand: WHY do we really need "SPAN" and "DIV"? I would think a single SPAN that could enclose anything, but would not introduce any extra semantics (such as block level as DIV does). A similar reasoning goes for "FORM". Why an earth it has to be "BLOCK LEVEL"? It should just be a plain grouping thing, without any representational semantics associated. (And if you say you cannot describe such a simple thing with SGML DTD, then there is deficiency in SGML DTD language, and that too is broken...:-) Internet is BROKEN! -- Markku Savela (msa@hemuli.tte.vtt.fi), Technical Research Centre of Finland Multimedia Systems, P.O.Box 1203,FIN-02044 VTT,http://www.vtt.fi/tte/staff/msa/
Received on Wednesday, 2 December 1998 09:26:13 UTC