|
|
Posted by dorayme on 07/20/05 09:47
> From: "freesoft_2000" <freesoft_2000@yahoo.com>
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I am trying to add pictures and so far everthing has
> been going well but i have a question. When i insert the pictures they
> show up and i am able to save the entire html document to disk in html
> format.
>
> The thing is when i delete the picture on the disk and
> open the html document the picture does not show up but if the picture is
> not deleted from the disk then when i open the html document the picture
> shows up.
>
> Basically what i need to know if there is a way in
> which i can embed a picture into the html document without any reliance on
> the picture that is saved on a different location on the disk.
>
> Basically my question is that is it possible to
> implement something like that in which that the picture is embedded in the
> html and it does not matter if the picture is deleted or not from the disk
> thus even when the html document is opened the embedded picture is still
> there.
>
> This is code that i am using to insert the picture
>
> <html>
> <head>
> </head>
> <body>
> <p>
> <img height="400" width="400" src="file:/D:/Sample_Pics/venu.jpg">
> </p>
> </body>
> </html>
>
> See the reliance on the picture picture always being on that location on
> the disk on this line
>
> src="file:/D:/Sample_Pics/venu.jpg"
>
> Is there a way to achieve what i need by simple ways or style sheets or
> any other way??
>
> Any help is greatly appreciated
>
>
OK, I trust you have taken on board Jonathan N. Little's excellent
analogy. Perhaps this adds something you may find helpful: The picture
is not "in" the html doc, as he explained. In a sense it *could* be -
but I don't know what the point would be? For example, you could have
the html text with pics in a Word doc or in a page layout doc or
embedded in an Illustrator file to look at. It would not be useful for
web implementation, perhaps more a memento or work of art, perhaps
celebrating a fine bit of html you are proud of.
But I sense that you are wanting to have a file that is the web page
itself somehow, in it's full expression. When you double click this one
file with no pic files or any others needed, it opens in a browser in
its full glory. Fine.
This is pretty much what happens when you save a web page in *some*
browsers. The browsers that have this capability ask you whether you
want to save the HTML itself or as a "web archive". Different browsers
do it different. For example, my IE 5 for a Mac asks this and has its
secret formula for doing it. You get a file that embeds all, there are
no associated files, no distinguishable pic files, html text files, css
files. It is all in a top secret proprietary coca cola formulae. It is
quite neat. The advantages are not great though, more a curiosity (there
are some pros and some cons).
So, you could open your original html in a browser like IE 5 for the
Mac, it will find the picture and display it. You could then save as a
web archive. You then could throw out your pic or move the web archive
to a CD and play it on another computer and your pic and all will
appear. You can recover the original files by looking and saving the
source code and saving the pics etc (the reverse). One little curiosity
is that you cannot easily recover any linked css file! Even though it
has been plainly taken into account. IE Mac developers have been
thinking hard and have done something quite clever and not a little
untransparent!
Some browsers merely save all the files when you want to save the
whole web page (or site, I will leave this complication out). For
example, my WaMCom Mozilla open source 1.3 calls it saving as a "Web
page, complete". Now what happens here is different to IE, here the
program simply saves the html and puts pics and linked css files in a
folder (just one level under the html) - basically and approximately
recovering the sort of arrangement that the web designer had on his
computer. Here there would be no advantage for you given that you perhaps
see an advantage in the "all embedded" secret technology of MS in IE.
Personally I like the way Mozilla does it because it is more transparent
and saves you work when you want to get all the files (to save and learn
from or change them, perhaps offline).
It is maybe rather different in the PC world. It is an interesting
matter though.
dorayme
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|