[docutils:feature-requests] #102 Image height/width attributes

- **status**: pending --> open-fixed
- **Comment**:

Fixed in [r9928]. Thank you for the report and discussion.



---

**[feature-requests:#102] Image height/width attributes**

**Status:** open-fixed
**Group:** Default
**Created:** Wed Dec 20, 2023 02:35 PM UTC by toastal
**Last Updated:** Sun Apr 07, 2024 05:08 PM UTC
**Owner:** nobody


When setting `:width:` or `:height:` on an image, the output is a `<image style="width: $W; height: $H">`. This isn’t the expected out put as there are & have been `width` & `height` attributes for the `<img>` tag for a long time. One might assume this is the same affect, but there are some important problems & why I think this is a bug for incorrect implementation.

1. Tools like Lighthouse, et al. show users to have width/height as a optimization so the browser can calculate & the image size properly without having to do a layout shift which is great
2. A good CSP (Content Security Policy) should never include `unsafe-inline` as this can be an attack surface but the output of `:width:` & `:height:` do just this.

The way to solve this to keep out unneeded inline style practice for good CSP but still have the width/height is to just use `<img width="$W" height="$H">` (at least when units are not specified).

What I may not be accounting for: units. `12px` is not the same as `12rem` or `12ex` or `12vw`. However, what I had input in my image was just plain ol’ integers got back something I didn’t expect: a) something using `px` (I‘m exclusively using relative unit like `em`, `rem`, etc.) and b) not using the attributes since the number I gave had no units.


---

Sent from sourceforge.net because [email protected] is subscribed to https://sourceforge.net/p/docutils/feature-requests/

To unsubscribe from further messages, a project admin can change settings at https://sourceforge.net/p/docutils/admin/feature-requests/options.  Or, if this is a mailing list, you can unsubscribe from the mailing list.