Posted by Jonathan N. Little on 06/08/05 01:47

Spartanicus wrote:
> "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@centralva.net> wrote:
>
>
>>>Layout should be presentational, if it's provided via css and the css
>>>isn't used for some reason then nothing essential should be lost.
>>>
>>>As a quality check authors should switch off images, css, client side
>>>scripting, java, plugins and other optional technologies, a page or site
>>>should remain fully functional.
>>
>>A place where CSS specified img dims can be useful is with a gallery of
>>thumbnails so the layout doesn't reflow as the thumbs load.
>
>
> As I wrote before, that's why you *should not* use CSS for this, but you
> snipped it, so here it is again:
>
> ---
> Image dimensions should be specified via html attributes, not via an
> optional component such as CSS.
>
> The function provided by supplying image dimensions to a browser before
> the images have been downloaded has no fall back, there is no graceful
> fail.
>
> Providing image dimensions beforehand allows a browser to layout a page
> before the actual images have been downloaded. Without knowing the image
> dimensions a browser would have to reflow the layout as the dimensions
> of each image becomes clear after each single image has downloaded.
> ---
>
> If the client has css disabled or the css file isn't used for some other
> reason (network or server problem for example) then the client has to
> reflow whilst the images download. Image dimensions should be supplied
> in the markup.
>
I agree that putting the dims in the markup is best, but one could argue
that the IMG SRC property determines the 'content' and therefore HTML
domain, and the WIDTH and HEIGHT effect the 'style' or 'presentation' of
the page and is a CSS issue... ;-)

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

[Back to original message]