[6771] in www-talk@info.cern.ch
Re: Overlaying inline images
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Koblas)
Tue Nov 22 14:41:46 1994
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 20:23:16 +0100
Errors-To: listmaster@www0.cern.ch
Reply-To: koblas@netcom.com
From: koblas@netcom.com (David Koblas)
To: Multiple recipients of list <www-talk@www0.cern.ch>
> The syntax might look something like this, as a strawman (or is that
> "cohesively-challenged-person"?) proposal:
>
> <Overlay IsMap>
> <Image width=1000 height=1000 src="Big-Map.gif">
> <Image width=120 height=120 src="Magnifying-glass-Stencil.gif"
> x-offset=290 y-offset=590
> TRANSPARENT>
> <Image width=100 height=100 src="Closeup-of-20S-45W.gif"
> x-offset=300 y-offset=600
> OPAQUE>
> </Overlay>
[ what are TRANSPARENT and OPAQUE how are they defined, used, etc... ]
I like this idea, there are some great potentials... But, I would think
it would be better to make a "few" changes.
<Viewport WIDTH=500 HEIGHT=200 BG=colorname ISMAP>
<IMG XPOS=... YPOS=... SRC=... ALT=...>
<IMG XPOS=... YPOS=... SRC=... ALT=...>
<IMG XPOS=... YPOS=... SRC=... ALT=...>
<ANNOTATE XPOS=... YPOS=...> text to render </ANNOTATE>
</Viewport>
[ this is very close to a GIF image file ]
Instead of making an overlay are this is more of a drawport/viewport
on an collection of images and graphics.
This is similar to the other thread about graphing. I think that
everybody clearly sees that HTML is graphically crippled. Part of
the fundimental question is if it is better to extend HTML or work
on better imbedding schemes.. (ie is it better to extend HTML or
work on adding suport for imbedding anchors <A HREF=... INLINE>)
David
--koblas@homepages.com
ps. I don't remember what the FIG element is/was in HTML+, but
I think there is some similarities here.
