RE: Are IMG height/width deprecated? Why not?

You know, I was thinking about that yesterday.  Some way of describing the
dimensions would be more appropriate than simply height and width.  You
would need more dimensions than just two for something as generic as an
object.  An object could be anything and could easily occupy many different
dimensions.  Height, width, depth, time, etc...  A stereoscopic photograph
occupies all of these dimensions, probably more if you analyzed it well.  I
don't think that these dimensions should override or modify the object's
appearance in any way; just describe the 'physical' properties for those who
cannot see, hear, touch, or comprehend them.  Obviously, style sheets should
modify the rendering of the object.

,David Norris

World Wide Web - http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/1652/
Illusionary Web - http://illusionary.dyn.ml.org/ <-- 02:00 - 10:00 GMT
Video/Audio Phone - callto:illusionary.dyn.ml.org
Page via mail - 412039@pager.mirabilis.com
ICQ Universal Internet Number - 412039
E-Mail - kg9ae@geocities.com

-----Original Message-----
From: www-html-request@w3.org [mailto:www-html-request@w3.org]On Behalf
Of dreamwvr
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 1998 3:46 PM
To: kg9ae@geocities.com; www-html@w3.org
Subject: RE: Are IMG height/width deprecated? Why not?

Received on Thursday, 21 May 1998 01:03:54 UTC