Image size markup?
-
https://meta.discourse.org/t/quick-image
Actually not a terrible idea.
-
@tsaukpaetra “That page doesn't exist or is private.” Looks like
's allergy to good ideas continues…
-
Quick image resizing and markdown image dimensions
As of today when you paste in images we no longer use IMG tags. So for example: Generates the Markdown  I also added an Ninja ⚔ feature that...
I buttume.
-
@arantor
awesome, so you have to do math if you want to specify a size other than the original, without skewing the picture?Nevermind, I should've read it. You can append
,x%to the size, to easily adjust it with the correct aspect.
-
@anotherusername and do so with non standard Markdown, by one of the groups who is literally the founders of "common Markdown" as a 'standard'.
-
As of today when you paste in images we no longer use IMG tags.
Not even after the Markdown has been transformed into HTML?
-
@anotherusername said in Image size markup:
You can append
,x%to the size, to easily adjust it with the correct aspect.That should be the default behaviour, not forced by adding a variable that typical users won’t remember (or even know), or think to be some arcane formula.
-
Yeah, let's just make a backwards-incompatible change to Markdown. What was CommonMark supposed to do, again? It was supposed to make there be more incompatible Markdown implementations, right?
-
@ben_lubar said in Image size markup:
Yeah, let's just make a backwards-incompatible change to Markdown. What was CommonMark supposed to do, again? It was supposed to make there be more incompatible Markdown implementations, right?
If only you could append arbitrarily named attributes to elements, then you'd be able to extend anything you wanted without any problems.
Having a markup language like that would sure be nice.
-
@anonymous234 said in Image size markup:
@ben_lubar said in Image size markup:
Yeah, let's just make a backwards-incompatible change to Markdown. What was CommonMark supposed to do, again? It was supposed to make there be more incompatible Markdown implementations, right?
If only you could append arbitrarily named attributes to elements, then you'd be able to extend anything you wanted without any problems.
Having a markup language like that would sure be nice.
If we standardized it, we could call it "standard general markup language"!
-
@ben_lubar let's make a version geared towards hypertext so we can link documents together!
Nah, it'll never catch on.
-
@ben_lubar said in Image size markup:
Yeah, let's just make a backwards-incompatible change to Markdown. What was CommonMark supposed to do, again? It was supposed to make there be more incompatible Markdown implementations, right?
Cue in my coworker who likes to retell the relevant XKCD strip about video standards every fucking day. Seriously, what's up with this guy. I'm positive there hasn't been a day where he wouldn't mention this strip and I have this feeling every day he's telling this story in a louder voice!
-
@kt_ said in Image size markup:
@ben_lubar said in Image size markup:
Yeah, let's just make a backwards-incompatible change to Markdown. What was CommonMark supposed to do, again? It was supposed to make there be more incompatible Markdown implementations, right?
Cue in my coworker who likes to retell the relevant XKCD strip about video standards every fucking day. Seriously, what's up with this guy. I'm positive there hasn't been a day where he wouldn't mention this strip and I have this feeling every day he's telling this story in a louder voice!
Relevant XKCD:
-
Jeff being Jeff
Manually resizing images is very advanced user scenario, I can’t even recall a time I needed to do that here in the last 6-12 months?
And then immediately bikeshedding
While this is definitely a nice quality of life improvement, our default filenames are pretty bad.
3X/e/7/e76d2a89947069f0ce624d5989fa20c47a13d383.png
Surely we don’t need that many characters to make each filename unique?How many times has anyone here looked at a generated image name and been worried about its length?
-
@jaloopa said in Image size markup:
How many times has anyone here looked at a generated image name and been worried about its length?
never really. especially since an image is supposed to be viewed, not have its file name inspected.
looking over the plan for the sizes i'll say it looks alike a neat idea. AFAICT it's backwards compatible so markdown generators that don't understand it won't break (they also won't generate the size tags) and......
wait...... am I actually agreeing with
's point of view.... that can't be righ.....oh actually yes it can. for all his assholishness and his massive reality distortion field
's ideas are usually worth listening to (so long as you have salt on hand), it's his insufferable 'tude and his assbackwards implementations i object to.
-
@accalia said in Image size markup:
looking over the plan for the sizes i'll say it looks alike a neat idea
Yeah, it looks like a decent extension to Markdown. But all Jeff has said is "don't put the 100% in by default" and "rah rah rah file name length", which is a completely different conversation (which, incidentally, hasn't been Jeffed)
-
@jaloopa Why would Jeff Jeff Jeff? Jeff doesn't Jeff Jeff, only Not!Jeff. Unless Jeff is Jeffing Jeff to a more public place, in which case, yes, Jeff would totally Jeff Jeff.
-
@raceprouk said in Image size markup:
@jaloopa Why would Jeff Jeff Jeff? Jeff doesn't Jeff Jeff, only Not!Jeff. Unless Jeff is Jeffing Jeff to a more public place, in which case, yes, Jeff would totally Jeff Jeff.
-
@accalia said in Image size markup:
@raceprouk said in Image size markup:
@jaloopa Why would Jeff Jeff Jeff? Jeff doesn't Jeff Jeff, only Not!Jeff. Unless Jeff is Jeffing Jeff to a more public place, in which case, yes, Jeff would totally Jeff Jeff.
-
@raceprouk said in Image size markup:
@jaloopa Why would Jeff Jeff Jeff? Jeff doesn't Jeff Jeff, only Not!Jeff. Unless Jeff is Jeffing Jeff to a more public place, in which case, yes, Jeff would totally Jeff Jeff.
Jeff Jeffs Jeff when Jeff accidentally Jeffed Jeff to a non Jeff approved Jeff target. In that situation, the Jeffed Jeff Jeff Jeffed needs to be jeffed back to its prejeff position
-
@accalia said in Image size markup:
@jaloopa said in Image size markup:
How many times has anyone here looked at a generated image name and been worried about its length?
never really. especially since an image is supposed to be viewed, not have its file name inspected.
looking over the plan for the sizes i'll say it looks alike a neat idea. AFAICT it's backwards compatible so markdown generators that don't understand it won't break (they also won't generate the size tags) and......
wait...... am I actually agreeing with
's point of view.... that can't be righ.....oh actually yes it can. for all his assholishness and his massive reality distortion field
's ideas are usually worth listening to (so long as you have salt on hand), it's his insufferable 'tude and his assbackwards implementations i object to.Yes, and it might technically help with some of the jellypotato!
-
@accalia said in Image size markup:
oh actually yes it can. for all his assholishness and his massive reality distortion field
's ideas are usually worth listening to (so long as you have salt on hand), it's his insufferable 'tude and his assbackwards implementations i object to.He's a blind squirrel looking for nuts. The wheat isn't worth the chaff. Better to share someone else's needle than look through the straw for his.
-
-
@heterodox said in Image size markup:
@boomzilla said in Image size markup:
Better to share someone else's needle
Yikes.
IKR? total unsanitary. empty sterile hypos are not hard to get.
-
@jaloopa said in Image size markup:
How many times has anyone here looked at a generated image name and been worried about its length?
You mean you don't?!?
-
-
@masonwheeler
I've got so much length to spare I never have to look for more
