AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules to ensure post quality. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: Limitations on image width  (Read 5560 times)

J N Winkler

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7782
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas
  • Last Login: Today at 04:23:23 AM
Limitations on image width
« on: December 02, 2009, 07:35:53 AM »

I am writing to ask if there is a policy or guideline limiting the width (in pixels) of images posted to the forum.

I noticed recently that one of my posts had been edited, with no apparent change to the text, and when I went into the edit window to see what changes had actually been made, I saw that width=800 tags had been added to a number of images with actual pixel widths of 942, 827, 893, and 788.  In this case, the images involved were all sign illustrations drawn and rasterized to a consistent scale, and the imposition of a uniform image width of 800 means that each image is now displayed at a different scale while viewers of the thread still have to consume the same bandwidth to load the images.  (Image width directives in tags do not allow browsers to forgo a full load of each image.)

I don't propose to undo these edits, but it would be helpful to have a certain image width above which images are considered fair game for insertion of width directives.  This would enable the images to be resampled to come down below this threshold, and so would save bandwidth and moderator effort.
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 12442
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: Today at 10:58:58 AM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: Limitations on image width
« Reply #1 on: December 02, 2009, 08:36:06 AM »

I'm pretty sure they've stated a policy/guideline of no wider than 800 pixels.
Logged

rickmastfan67

  • The Invisible One
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3102
  • I want I-67 in PA!!!!

  • Age: 37
  • Location: Pittsburgh, Pa, USA
  • Last Login: September 30, 2022, 09:04:20 PM
Re: Limitations on image width
« Reply #2 on: December 02, 2009, 08:43:41 AM »

You are correct Froggie.  The width limit is indeed 800 pixels.

J N Winkler

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7782
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas
  • Last Login: Today at 04:23:23 AM
Re: Limitations on image width
« Reply #3 on: December 02, 2009, 10:52:56 AM »

Thanks for this.  I did try to look up the pixel width/height limits (since this is a classic example of a RTFM question) but was not able to find a "Posting guidelines" page linked from the forum front page.  A Google search for {AARoads forum posting guidelines} did turn up this, which I suggest would profit from greater prominence.
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

rawmustard

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 779
  • Posin' with the marker

  • Age: 41
  • Location: Battle Creek, MI
  • Last Login: September 23, 2022, 11:54:52 PM
    • Blog
Re: Limitations on image width
« Reply #4 on: December 02, 2009, 11:02:50 AM »

Thanks for this.  I did try to look up the pixel width/height limits (since this is a classic example of a RTFM question) but was not able to find a "Posting guidelines" page linked from the forum front page.  A Google search for {AARoads forum posting guidelines} did turn up this, which I suggest would profit from greater prominence.

It's a sticky within the "Welcome!" forum (same forum as this thread), although I agree it would be better if that thread were linked from the front page.
Logged

deathtopumpkins

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2419
  • Location: Southern NH
  • Last Login: September 20, 2022, 12:43:19 PM
Re: Limitations on image width
« Reply #5 on: December 02, 2009, 05:54:21 PM »

I really don't see any better place for it than stickied in the Welcome! board. That's the first place I'd look for it.

And I question your inability to find it considering that it is stickied at the top of this very board...
Logged
Disclaimer: All posts represent my personal opinions and not those of my employer.

Clinched Highways | Counties Visited

J N Winkler

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7782
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas
  • Last Login: Today at 04:23:23 AM
Re: Limitations on image width
« Reply #6 on: December 03, 2009, 04:30:59 AM »

Believe me, I did not find the "Posting guidelines" thread, even though I was looking for information it contained and had looked at it months ago.  Think about it this way:  there is a bright shining line between durable standards (like maximum pixel widths) and discussion threads where, in general, anyone can post, the content can change from day to day, and (unless the thread is stickied in some way) pronouncements from authority can be obscured by later postings to other threads.

For material which logically should belong in the first category, most experienced Internet users' first port of call would be something calling itself "FAQ," "Guidelines," or similar, which would be linked from the board top page, on the theory that if the board owners really wish for the rules to be followed, they will be given maximum possible prominence.

In contradistinction, finding the guidelines thread relies on users realizing (1) that it will be in a Meta board which is one link away from the top page and contains mostly introduction threads, and (2) that it will have been stickied in perpetuity, and so it will not be necessary to use a search engine of uncertain specification to find it.  (I never even considered using the forum search to find the version of the posting guidelines which turned up in a Google search.  I know how Google works, so I can guess that the page I am interested in will be near the top of the results returned, and I won't have to trawl through a load of irrelevant material to find it.  I don't have similar confidence with forum search engines in general.)

As I see it, it is fundamentally a question of usability.  There will be some troublesome users who are determined to push the rules to breaking point, but in my experience it is more common for users simply to forget technical details like maximum pixel width criteria.  In my case, I had totally forgotten there were such criteria, and had instead been seeking to size my images in a way which would minimize horizontal scrolling, for general usability reasons.  (There are numerous examples of images in the Road-related Illustrations thread, for example, which force horizontal scrolling even on my system, and I am using a laptop with 1280 x 800 screen resolution.)  Of course, ignorantia non excusat, but in reality a person who succeeds in complying with the rules most of the time will not have occasion to look at a "Guidelines" thread often, and can easily forget that it is there and that it is the vehicle for communicating posting standards.
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

Alps

  • y u m
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15194
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 39
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: September 30, 2022, 04:20:24 PM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: Limitations on image width
« Reply #7 on: December 03, 2009, 08:08:37 PM »

It is a useful suggestion to move the Guidelines to a more noticeable location, or at least have a noticeable "FAQ/Guidelines" link from the front page.  I think we ought to take it under consideration.

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.