<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/strict.dtd"><html><head><meta name="qrichtext" content="1" /><style type="text/css">p, li { white-space: pre-wrap; }</style></head><body style=" font-family:'DejaVu Sans'; font-size:9pt; font-weight:400; font-style:normal;">On Wednesday 17 June 2009, Martin Renold wrote: > > ..."width" and "height" are positive integer, their default value is set > > to the value defined by the data source for a layer... > > Thinking about this, I don't see any benefit for the width/height attribute > at all, as opposed to using an explicit crop filter when needed. It seems > like an unneccessary and tricky task to calculate those default values. > > I used to think this was a good idea to define the image frame (something I > want to introduce soon in MyPaint), however even this does not work at all, > at least not consistently with the position in the <image> tag. > > Can we just remove generic size/height attributes from the spec please? Any > objections? Well I guess the width/height attribute were just added by copy/paste from the image tag... So yes, I agree that width/height can be removed for layers (and vice/versa for x/y in image). When it comes to image, the width/height is needed, but optional, if width/height isn't defined, then the image has the size of the bounding box. -- Cyrille Berger</body></html>