Velocity Reviews

Velocity Reviews (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/index.php)
-   HTML (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/f31-html.html)
-   -   Embedding a Graphic Instead of using <img src="..."> (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t157204-embedding-a-graphic-instead-of-using-img-src.html)

David Elliott 02-18-2004 09:12 PM

Embedding a Graphic Instead of using <img src="...">
 

Is there a way to encode a graphic and then embed it into an HTML File?


Thanks,
Dave

Hywel 02-18-2004 10:19 PM

Re: Embedding a Graphic Instead of using <img src="...">
 
In article <p5l7309v0lvpia0rqn3f16vne1qv0vj9vg@4ax.com>,
DavidElliott@BellSouth.net.nospam says...
>
> Is there a way to encode a graphic and then embed it into an HTML File?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Dave


Not without some very dodgy table or <div> mark-up.

--
Hywel I do not eat quiche
http://hyweljenkins.co.uk/
http://hyweljenkins.co.uk/mfaq.php

David Dorward 02-18-2004 11:10 PM

Re: Embedding a Graphic Instead of using <img src="...">
 
David Elliott wrote:
> Is there a way to encode a graphic and then embed it into an HTML File?


http://www.mozilla.org/quality/netwo...aboutdata.html
Works in Mozilla based browsers and recent versions of Opera.

--
David Dorward <http://dorward.me.uk/>

Steve Pugh 02-18-2004 11:40 PM

Re: Embedding a Graphic Instead of using <img src="...">
 
David Elliott <DavidElliott@BellSouth.net.nospam> wrote:

>
>Is there a way to encode a graphic and then embed it into an HTML File?


Yes, see http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2397.html.

Not supported by IE, so in practical terms useless for the web.

Steve

--
"My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you,
I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor

Steve Pugh <steve@pugh.net> <http://steve.pugh.net/>

Marc Nadeau 02-19-2004 03:29 AM

Re: Embedding a Graphic Instead of using <img src="...">
 
Hywel a écrit:

> In article <p5l7309v0lvpia0rqn3f16vne1qv0vj9vg@4ax.com>,
> DavidElliott@BellSouth.net.nospam says...
>>
>> Is there a way to encode a graphic and then embed it into an HTML File?
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dave

>
> Not without some very dodgy table or <div> mark-up.
>


And should be restricted to _very_ small images since it produces huges html
files.

The gimp (Gnu Image Manipulation Program) can export graphics to html code
like this.

Bonne chance!

--
mv sco /dev/null
#
Marc Nadeau - La Pagerie - http://www.pagerie.com

Neil Marshall 02-19-2004 04:19 AM

Re: Embedding a Graphic Instead of using <img src="...">
 
David Elliott wrote:

>Is there a way to encode a graphic and then embed it into an HTML File?
>
>


Here is a perl program for making data: url's. The one without the
extension runs, the one with the extension is the source code.
http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/cgi/data/


Toby A Inkster 02-19-2004 07:30 AM

Re: Embedding a Graphic Instead of using <img src="...">
 
David Dorward wrote:

> David Elliott wrote:
>> Is there a way to encode a graphic and then embed it into an HTML File?

>
> http://www.mozilla.org/quality/netwo...aboutdata.html
> Works in Mozilla based browsers and recent versions of Opera.


It should be noted that Opera 7.1x often crashed on some well-formed
"data:" URLs. Opera 7.2x fixes the problem.

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
Contact Me - http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/?page=132


Whitecrest 02-19-2004 10:24 AM

Re: Embedding a Graphic Instead of using <img src="...">
 
In article <c10rfo$6ei$4$830fa17d@news.demon.co.uk>, dorward@yahoo.com
says...
> David Elliott wrote:
> > Is there a way to encode a graphic and then embed it into an HTML File?

>
> http://www.mozilla.org/quality/netwo...aboutdata.html
> Works in Mozilla based browsers and recent versions of Opera.



So what you are saying is that this will NOT work on 90% of the browsers
being used.

If losing less than 15% because of javascript is a bad idea, how can
someone justify using something that doesn't work in 90% of the
browsers?

Someone is sending mixed signals....

--
Whitecrest Entertainment
www.whitecrestent.com

Kris 02-19-2004 10:38 AM

Re: Embedding a Graphic Instead of using <img src="...">
 
In article <MPG.1a9e58f0b169b8be989a1c@news.charter.net>,
Whitecrest <whitecrest@zipzap.com> wrote:

> > http://www.mozilla.org/quality/netwo...aboutdata.html
> > Works in Mozilla based browsers and recent versions of Opera.

>
>
> So what you are saying is that this will NOT work on 90% of the browsers
> being used.
>
> If losing less than 15% because of javascript is a bad idea, how can
> someone justify using something that doesn't work in 90% of the
> browsers?


I believe it was never said "don't use JavaScript" without adding "to
rely your site on". I don't see why this does not go for this as well.
Optional or badly supported technology? Don't rely on it.

> Someone is sending mixed signals....


I don't think he is. But I'll leave defense at that. I am only replying
to prove the above point, not to stand up for someone who can perfectly
stand up for himself if he thinks it is even worth to consider.

--
Kris
<kristiaan@xs4all.netherlands> (nl)
<http://www.cinnamon.nl/>

Whitecrest 02-19-2004 11:06 AM

Re: Embedding a Graphic Instead of using <img src="...">
 
In article <kristiaan-87AA96.11383219022004@newszilla.xs4all.nl>,
kristiaan@xs4all.netherlands says...
> In article <MPG.1a9e58f0b169b8be989a1c@news.charter.net>,
> Whitecrest <whitecrest@zipzap.com> wrote:
>
> > > http://www.mozilla.org/quality/netwo...aboutdata.html
> > > Works in Mozilla based browsers and recent versions of Opera.

> >
> >
> > So what you are saying is that this will NOT work on 90% of the browsers
> > being used.
> >
> > If losing less than 15% because of javascript is a bad idea, how can
> > someone justify using something that doesn't work in 90% of the
> > browsers?

>
> I believe it was never said "don't use JavaScript" without adding "to
> rely your site on".....


Your reading way too much into what I wrote, I was speaking in general
terms, an observation of behaviour in the group if you will.

David (and others that offered this solution) takes the stand, "don't
use javascript". Why? Because 15% of the people browsing will not be
able to use it for one reason or another. And give or take a percent or
two, they are absolutely right.

I was commenting on how interesting it was that someone with that
viewpoint would offer a solution that would not work in 90% of the
browsers out there, but did not offer a similar warning (or repetitive
links) about how bad it would be and how you would be discriminating
against millions... (Again I am speaking in general not of any
individual.)

The OP's problem has been answered. Several have offered a solution
that will work on a percentage of browsers. Now they have to make a
choice. The lady or the tiger. (That is a reference to a story about
choices in case one was wondering.)


--
Whitecrest Entertainment
www.whitecrestent.com


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:23 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.