eTianbun Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 I tried <image src='img.png'/> an it actually works fine in all my browsers (opera, green browser, M-firefox, internet explorer). Anything to say about this? I thought no such tag exist, but <img>! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowMage Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 The tag does not exist. If you try to validate a page that uses <image> you will get errors. When browsers render an HTML page, they try to fix it up when they encounter errors. When they see <image> they are assuming you meant to use <img>. In fact, I'll bet that if you inspect the element using Firebug for FireFox or Chrome's developer tools you'll see that the browsers have changed the tag to <img>. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eTianbun Posted February 24, 2012 Author Share Posted February 24, 2012 Ok, thanks 4 de info. I think it should have been <image> and not <img>. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowMage Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 Actually, I prefer img. It's shorter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thescientist Posted February 24, 2012 Share Posted February 24, 2012 and so by that logic we should call other tags paragraph, anchor, division, etc too? That wouldn't get old... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eTianbun Posted February 25, 2012 Author Share Posted February 25, 2012 Not realy! Short names should be written in full & long once, abbreviated or they find another word for it.in HTML5, there're: <audio> and <video> tags, there is nothing wrong with having <image> tag. Tag like <section>, ll be easier for beginners to remenber than <div>. like the <q> tag can be written in full as <quote> & <b> tag as <bold>...This is just my own view, but i dont know about others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eTianbun Posted February 25, 2012 Author Share Posted February 25, 2012 Actually, I prefer img. It's shorter. Yeah, i like it too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WebEn2siaX Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 hi to all!I don't know if this is new or maybe someone may have ask this already. I'm kinda new here, and I was searching for a topic on image problems.Hope it is fine posting it here.well, here's the thing, I encountered a problem with displaying an image using the firefox browser, the image was blurry using firefox but is working fine with IE, and chrome. I wonder what the problem may be. please anyone. thanks in advance! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingolme Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 It sounds like you were loading an interlaced PNG and you just didn't wait long enough for the image to fully load. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eTianbun Posted March 3, 2012 Author Share Posted March 3, 2012 How long did u wait? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WebEn2siaX Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 actually the image is an icon(are there disadvantage using an icon?), but i changed it already and used PNG instead. works fine now!Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thescientist Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 you mean as in image.ico? well, if it's not well supported by a browser (in the <img> tag), than that would be considered a disadvantage. I've never tried using a .ico file in an image tag before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
valiantshady Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 I tried<image src='img.png'/> an it actually works fine in all my browsers (opera, green browser, M-firefox, internet explorer). Anything to say about this? I thought no such tag exist, but <img>! As far as I know, the X HTML concepts and principles does not allow certain ways of codes with their validator and will produce errors.But functional-wise it maybe working yet unaccepted. it's more like being LEGAL yet UNETHICAL if you know what I mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regicidedelferoz Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 Not realy! Short names should be written in full & long once, abbreviated or they find another word for it.in HTML5, there're: <audio> and <video> tags, there is nothing wrong with having <image> tag. Tag like <section>, ll be easier for beginners to remenber than <div>. like the <q> tag can be written in full as <quote> & <b> tag as <bold>...This is just my own view, but i dont know about others. lol,. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.