Дневник
Меню сайта


Календарь
«  Декабрь 2008  »
ПнВтСрЧтПтСбВс
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031


Форма входа
Логин:
Пароль:


Поиск по дневнику


Друзья сайта



Главная страница » 2008 » Декабрь » 1
2008-12-01, 12:45:05
Does your browser W3C Complaint? http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2007/12/19/internet-explorer-8-and-acid2-a-milestone.aspx http://www.webstandards.org/action/acid2/guide/ http://dustinbrewer.com/developers-are-working-on-acid3-test/
Reads: 14 | Added by: igor_ber | Comments (0)

2008-12-01, 12:44:01
http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www-talk.1993q1/0182.html That's history! :) proposed new tag: IMG Marc Andreessen (marca@ncsa.uiuc.edu) Thu, 25 Feb 93 21:09:02 -0800 I'd like to propose a new, optional HTML tag: IMG Required argument is SRC="url". This names a bitmap or pixmap file for the browser to attempt to pull over the network and interpret as an image, to be embedded in the text at the point of the tag's occurrence. An example is: (There is no closing tag; this is just a standalone tag.) This tag can be embedded in an anchor like anything else; when that happens, it becomes an icon that's sensitive to activation just like a regular text anchor. Browsers should be afforded flexibility as to which image formats they support. Xbm and Xpm are good ones to support, for example. If a browser cannot interpret a given format, it can do whatever it wants instead (X Mosaic will pop up a default bitmap as a placeholder). This is required functionality for X Mosaic; we have this working, and we'll at least be using it internally. I'm certainly open to suggestions as to how this should be handled within HTML; if you have a better idea than what I'm presenting now, please let me know. I know this is hazy wrt image format, but I don't see an alternative than to just say ``let the browser do what it can'' and wait for the perfect solution to come along (MIME, someday, maybe). Let me know what you think......... Cheer...
Reads: 15 | Added by: igor_ber | Comments (0)