Attribute references

[Joshua Cook]

I disagree with creating any new shortcut syntax for attributes other
than class and id.  Images should be given a class or id, then the
height and width should be specified in CSS.  Specifying the
dimensions of an image with inline attributes violates the spirit of
separating content from presentation.

Joshua

On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 20:07:09 -0500, Michel Fortin
<michel.fortin at michelf.com> wrote:
> Le 9 janv. 2005, à 17:09, Lou Quillio a écrit :
> 
> >     !(path/to/image){[alt text] 176/80 .right}
> >
> >     <img src="path/to/image" alt="alt text" width="176" height="80"
> > class="right" />
> 
> Hum, your idea for a new width and height shortcut is a good one,
> except I would write `176x80` instead of `176/80`. And I would put it
> inside the parenthesis since it is specific to images and mostly tied
> to the URL. What do you think of this?
> 
>         ![text](img/river.gif 176x80)
> 
> * * *
> 
> I strongly believe that alternative text is at the right place in front
> of the image path, because:
> 
> 1.      It is not optional, but required by the HTML specification.
>         By concept, everything inside curly brackets is optional.
> 
> 2.      Alternative text should contains a textual representation of your
>         image. But you can invert things and see the image as a alternative
>         and nicer representation of the text in the alt attribute. Both
>         should be interchangeable.
> 
>         Putting the alt attribute first puts emphasis on readability: you
>         write some text in the document, with a link-like indication of where
>         to find the image replacement for that text.
> 
> 
> Michel Fortin
> michel.fortin at michelf.com
> http://www.michelf.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Markdown-Discuss mailing list
> Markdown-Discuss at six.pairlist.net
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
>