In article <jollyroger-99401C.13212602052008@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> In article <siegman-21CABC.10375702052008@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> AES <siegman@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > Just downloaded a gorgeous 2592 X 1944 pixel JPEG of an equally
gorgeous
> > Alpine scene, which opened initially at browser window size
> >
> > However, the pointer, when moved over the picture, turned into a
little
> > magnifying glass which, when clicked, re-centered and magnified the
> > image within that window. blowing it up to what I guess was "a one
> > screen pixel per image pixel" magnification.
> >
> > Haven't found any mention of this neat capability in Safari Help. Is
> > this a Safari-specific feature?
>
> No. As Steve mentioned, this feature has been around in Netscape-based
> browsers for a long, long time. Safari copied it from Netscape/Firefox.
>
> > Does it happen automatically, or is it
> > something that needs be coded into the image source
>
> It's coded into the web browser.
>
> > or into the HTML
> > code that puts the image on a web site?
>
> You could write code into your web pages that does this - possibly in a
> slicker way, with some sort of animation - if you wanted to do that.
It would be a very unwise thing, generally speaking, to make a webpage
with such a large picture, (who has such a massive screen? what would
dialup users or slow broadband think?). But given that a website author
wants to be able to cater for large screens, he could prepare different
sized images, from say 400px across to 1600px and simply create links
for the user to go bigger and bigger (perhaps three or four sizes would
suffice!).
The advantage is bandwidth and clarity, especially bandwidth. No one
wants to download a 2592 px wide pic if they are only interested in
seeing it at 400px.
But let us suppose the user knows what he is in for and wants big as
well as small and it be *continuous* rather than in set sizes. One way
to do this is to simply code for the big picture but put a relative
width specification in (and hope the user does not have a screen much
bigger than the native pic size - otherwise quality seriously starts to
suffer). The width would be relative in percentage terms to some html
element. The element itself might be set to be the width of the browser
window. This works well on most Mac browsers:
<http://dorayme.890m.com/alt/rel_sizing.html>
Note that here, the width of the img is set to 100% width of the
containing zero margined and padded div; the div fills the zero margined
and padded body; and so the image which is sole content, fills the
view****t horizontally.
It will not necessarily fill the view****t height because the height
specification is left to the browser to calculate, and it quite properly
uses the natural px height of the picture file. You should never get
horizontal scroll bars with the above, but if you play about with the
browser window size, you will get vertical ones.
You *can* specify for height too, but I will stop here...
--
dorayme
|
