Subject: Re: [xsl] trying again: automaticly image width and height From: Peter Flynn <peter@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 16:40:26 +0100 (IST) |
> > Memory leaks? > > i am running linux Linux is not immune to memory leaks :-) > i will try it. thanks for your help. but isn´t this img width and > height inserting such a common problem that their should be a > ready-to-use extension?? No, actually, it's pretty rare IMHE. When I insert an illustration into a document, I typically have several versions: one high-res JPG or PNG for the PDF, one screen-res GIF or JPG for the Web page, and possibly a PostScript vector and/or an SVG if it's line rather than tone. I give height or width as a percentage of page width, or line set length, or steps of grid size, according to what the designer specifies (very rarely an arbitrary dimension: designers usually scale illustrations to a size related to the dimensions or proportions of other objects on the page). I rely on the rendering software (browser, typesetter, etc) to scale the image for presentation, using the relevant file type. The conventional caveat about not scaling Web graphics really only applies when page creators carelessly supply icon-sized IMG elements (eg WIDTH="32") but reference 4Mb uncompressed JPGs to be scaled down. However, hand-made bitmap graphics designed to be rendered dot-for-dot need to be specified as such, with dimensions in pixels, to avoid blurring or distortion, and in those cases I think what you say is correct, there is a need for this to auto-read the bitmap. ///Peter XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] trying again: automaticly, Benjamin Franz | Thread | [xsl] what am I missing?, Carlton Noles |
Re: [xsl] trying again: automaticly, Benjamin Franz | Date | RE: [xsl] what am I missing?, Michael Kay |
Month |