This is the mail archive of the xsl-list@mulberrytech.com mailing list .


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: trying again: automaticly image width and height


> > Memory leaks?
> 
> i am running linux

Linux is not immune to memory leaks :-) 

> i will try it. thanks for your help. but isnīt 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


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]