- From: Brian Cummiskey <Brian@hondaswap.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 02:25:35 +0000
- To: www-html@w3.org
fowlertrainer@anonym.hu wrote: > > HTML files are optimized to one size. 800/600, or 1024/768. Maybe yours are, but none of mine are. All my pages will look fine anywhere from 300 wide to 2800 wide. > > The pictures are sized to same pixel ratio. Rastor-based Images as we know them on the web- gif/jpg/png, cannot be dynamical sized based on anything without failing to pixelization of the image. Only Vector-based graphics can be scaled. I for one refuse to place Flash/swf on my webpages, and thus, will not have an option to show vector graphics to my users. > But I think, that some Windows MetaFile - like operations are missing > from HTML. > > <viewport width=100px height=100px canresize=True> > <line x1=10 y1=10 x2=50 y2=50> > <box pos="10,10,20,20" fillcolor="red" fillstyle="thincross_left"> > <text pos="80,80" text="Test" font="arial" size="8"> > </viewport> > > <viewport initwidth=100px initheight=100px canresize=True> > <line x1=20% y1=20% x2=50% y2=50%> > </viewport> > > If HTML is extended by this, the pictures (diagrams, etc.) are maked > resizable ! Marked, maybe- but it won't work with desirable results. > > Because many-many program, and other documents are stored in HTML > format, every need images. > But images are not resizable without data loss (or add). Only > metafile-like things are resizable. Now you're on to the same thinking I am :) So, if a windows meta file is added, as you sugegst above, rastor images can now be scaled without pixelization? Even if it does work- What about Linix, Unix, Mac/Apple, and BSD operating systems? They don't have windows meta files. > > The UML-s, and other pictures are convertable to this language, and in > the internet we will better documents like before. > > Thanx for reading: Good ideas- i just don't see it ever being feasable. My $.02 -Brian
Received on Thursday, 10 February 2005 03:41:19 UTC