[whatwg] [HTML5] 2.9.16. The samp element
giecrilj at stegny.2a.pl
Tue Dec 11 09:02:58 PST 2007
Dnia 11-12-2007, Wt o godzinie 14:44 +0100, Christoph Päper pisze:
> 2007-12-11 05:56 Ian Hickson:
> > On Tue, 21 Mar 2006, Christoph Paeper wrote:
> >> Would the following be inadequate usage according to this
> >> specification?
> >> <a href="foo.img"><samp><img src="foo.t.img" alt="..."/></samp></a>
> > Yes. The former would be appropriate if a computer output the given
> > image
> > and that was the subject under discussion;
> That means screenshots, doesn't it?
> But computers "output" many more kinds of images, e.g. when they
> render, scan, read out cameras or other media, reel through films ...
> I think it's hard to tell the essential difference.
> Of course almost nobody actually uses |samp| in galleries and the
> like at the moment, so it's not a big deal.
> > I'm not convinced that there's really a need to unambiguously mark
> > up thumbnails as distinct from anything else, though.
> Neither am I, but there are programs or browser plugins that could
> make good use out of this information. OTOH it might fit better into
> the |rel| (or |rev|) attribute of the surrounding |a| (or it's done
> by a predefined class for |img|).
> Another question would be whether the linked image had to be the
> original (e.g. the full-size screenshot) or just a better
> representation of it (e.g. the larger scan of a book cover).
We are talking about three different objects: a sample, an abstract and
an excerpt. Throwing them all into one sack does not seem to be a
brilliant idea to me.
More information about the whatwg