It is present in this paper on DOM Level 1 near the bottom under HTMLImageElement:
http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-DOM-Level-1-19981001/level-one-html.html

However it’s not in the HTML 4.01 spec:
http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/

It’s not put back in the HTML 5 working draft either. Upon reading there, I also noticed that the longdesc attribute has so far been struck from the spec.
http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/embedded-content-0.html#the-img-element
(so much for that longdesc hack)

I vote for the return of lowsrc. I think it’s relevant again.

Using this attribute also adds more functionality, since the acnhor around the image could lead to something else – a page! Today the anchor would lead to the big image, I would very much like to both show the large image size and be able to link to another destination.

The fullsize attribute with solve both theese scenarious, and give me the power I need to feel confortable with the sollution.

Example:

I could now enable the user to zoom the image for maximum pleasure, and you could still click the thumbnail to retrieve the real destination of the image!

Naturally we could just add the attribute to the SRC and don’t give a crap about the specification, alter the imagepopup scripts and do it ourselves as I explained. However – we do love the standards,

Do you really want this? NO, that’s the same as creating a history.go(-1) link, your reinvent the wheel, it’s the back button + it doesn’t work when javascript is disable OR there’s no referer.

Fullsize attribute? Come on… The img tag is refering to itself, the src attribute IS the full size of the img tag. What would be the “full” size then if the src attribute is already the full size? This is an ugly patch to HTML standards to achieve something that is already possible.

Sorry again but I’m more concerned by IE6 than this fullsize attribute

If you really want to add some granularity to HTML, patch the OBJECT tag… an object could be an image, and it could have a fullsize parameter.

Of course you could always build your own wheel via javascript if you would like.

But this effect is sooo common that myself and others think it should become a standard on the web.

Thanks!
Drew Wilson

If you have javascript, you don’t need an extra attribute to tell your big picture has the same name + “-big” at the end of its name (excepted if your big picture name doesn’t start with the same, which would be an bad pratice but who knows…).

It would be easy to parse the src, get the filename and add “-big” at the end. It’s just a naming convention you have to stick to.

You can add an anchor if you want. That will still work. Most these types of questions are answered in the videos or on the Google Group.

I am proposing that Fullsize be supported natively by the browser. So if javascript is on or off… it is irrelevant.

If you are referring to my jQuery plugin, then if javascript is turned off none of jquery would work at all anyway.

Let’s be realistic here, only 5% of users browse with javascript turned off, so it is not an issue in most all cases. http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp

If you are worried about your users having javascript turned off then don’t use javascript. But I am proposing that Fullsize be supported natively, and not rely on javascript.

Thanks!
Drew Wilson

You will still always be able to use your own javascript method if you choose. But if you would like to quickly provide this functionality, that is what Fullsize would be for.

Thanks!
Drew Wilson

really this MUST be an april fool.