9 ms·

Proposed new tag: IMG [1993]

21 points by franzb 11y ago

zeisss 11y ago
Wasn't there some rule to mark old content with the year it was published? So 1993 in this case.
- HerpDerpLerp 11y ago
  I think that would make the link much less fun!
amyjess 11y ago
The interesting thing is the formats specified in Andreesen's request: Xbm and Xpm. This was a time before JPEG and GIF (and certainly before PNG). I have some vague memories of the old days, when compressed images were a novelty, and people were talking about how you had to have special software to view GIF, which was described as this special ultra-high-tech format. I think the main program people recommended was called GIFConverter, which itself is a telling name because it shows just how much of a new concept compression was that you somehow had to "convert" the image in order to display it. (edit: just checked, and not only is GIFConverter still maintained, but it's now available for iOS as well... didn't expect that)
- frik 11y ago
  Nope, read on, GIF was supported from day one: http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www-talk.1993q1/0257.html http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www-talk.1993q1/0257.ht... "Back to the inlined image thread again -- I'm getting close to releasing Mosaic v0.10, which will support inlined GIF and XBM images/bitmaps, as mentioned previously." -- Marc Andreessen (Fri, 12 Mar 93) XBM file support had been removed in Internet Explorer 6 (IE 1-6 is based on Mosaic code, see IE6 about dialog): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XBM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XBM
  - amyjess 11y ago
    Oh, I'm not disputing that. I just thought it was an interesting bit of history that the original message (which OP linked to) mentioned two dead formats and none of the formats that are integral to the modern web.
frik 11y ago
Marc Andreessen proposal was simple and his Mosaic with inline image support had been release first. Good. Otherwise it would be called ICON instead of IMG or be part of an overly complicated A-tag. It also explains the nuance between the HREF (A-tag) and SRC (IMG-tag) attributes.
ojii 11y ago
In the next message is this gem: > I was proposing to use the file extension (.xbm above) to tag what format the image was in, but with the intention that in future, when HTTP2 comes along, the same format negotiation technique would be used to access images.
terhechte 11y ago
It is fascinating to go through the thread history and read the names of the people commenting on the proposal: - Tim Berners-Lee - Guido van Rossum - Marc Andreessen

21 points by franzb 11y ago

zeisss 11y ago

Wasn't there some rule to mark old content with the year it was published? So 1993 in this case.

HerpDerpLerp 11y ago
I think that would make the link much less fun!

amyjess 11y ago

The interesting thing is the formats specified in Andreesen's request: Xbm and Xpm. This was a time before JPEG and GIF (and certainly before PNG). I have some vague memories of the old days, when compressed images were a novelty, and people were talking about how you had to have special software to view GIF, which was described as this special ultra-high-tech format. I think the main program people recommended was called GIFConverter, which itself is a telling name because it shows just how much of a new concept compression was that you somehow had to "convert" the image in order to display it. (edit: just checked, and not only is GIFConverter still maintained, but it's now available for iOS as well... didn't expect that)

frik 11y ago
Nope, read on, GIF was supported from day one: http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www-talk.1993q1/0257.html http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www-talk.1993q1/0257.ht... "Back to the inlined image thread again -- I'm getting close to releasing Mosaic v0.10, which will support inlined GIF and XBM images/bitmaps, as mentioned previously." -- Marc Andreessen (Fri, 12 Mar 93) XBM file support had been removed in Internet Explorer 6 (IE 1-6 is based on Mosaic code, see IE6 about dialog): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XBM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XBM
- amyjess 11y ago
  Oh, I'm not disputing that. I just thought it was an interesting bit of history that the original message (which OP linked to) mentioned two dead formats and none of the formats that are integral to the modern web.

frik 11y ago

Marc Andreessen proposal was simple and his Mosaic with inline image support had been release first. Good. Otherwise it would be called ICON instead of IMG or be part of an overly complicated A-tag. It also explains the nuance between the HREF (A-tag) and SRC (IMG-tag) attributes.

ojii 11y ago

In the next message is this gem: > I was proposing to use the file extension (.xbm above) to tag what format the image was in, but with the intention that in future, when HTTP2 comes along, the same format negotiation technique would be used to access images.

terhechte 11y ago

It is fascinating to go through the thread history and read the names of the people commenting on the proposal: - Tim Berners-Lee - Guido van Rossum - Marc Andreessen