Re: proposed new tag: IMG
Marc Andreessen (email@example.com)
Fri, 26 Feb 93 13:17:01 -0800
"Tony Johnson (415) 926 2278" writes:
> I have something very similar in Midas 2.0 (in use here at SLAC, and
> due for public release any week now), except that all the names are
> different, and it has an extra argument NAME="name". It has almost
> exactly the same functionality as your proposed IMG tag. e.g.
> <ICON name="NoEntry" href="http://note/foo/bar/NoEntry.xbm">
> The idea of the name parameter was to allow the browser to have a
> set of "built in" images. If the name matches a "built in" image it
> would use that instead of having to go out and fetch the image. The
> name could also act as a hint for "line mode" browsers as to what
> kind of a symbol to put in place of the image.
Sounds like a good idea -- we should have a list of more-or-less
standard names, then. Which ones are you using?
> I was proposing to use the file extension (.xbm above) to tag what
> format the image was in, but with the intention that in future, when
> HTTP2 comes along, the same format negotiation technique would be
> used to access images.
Yup. BTW, someone mentioned ``what happened to MIME'' -- this isn't a
substitute for the upcoming use of MIME as a standard document
mechanism; this provides a necessary and simple implementation of
functionality that's needed independently from MIME.
Software Development Group
National Center for Supercomputing Applications