Origin of the IMG tag

[theyoungceo]

http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www-talk.1993q1/0182.html

[knome]

Anybody notice Guido van Russum commenting two messages into that chain?

http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www-talk.1993q1/0184.ht...

[icky → knome]

from datetime import TimeMachine

[davidw]

Worse is better:

http://1997.webhistory.org/www.lists/www-talk.1993q1/0257.ht...

[paul → davidw]

_Works_ is better. "Functional now" beats "theoretically great but not quite usable yet".

[dag → paul]

Speaking of that, anyone heard from Arc recently?

A 'works now' version would be nice, release the 3000 version later.

[snorkel]

Fascinating reading the entire discussion thread. Andressen proposes a simple tag for embedding images and right away everyone else makes more complicated proposals. Tim Bernes-Lee himself suggests only embedding icons in links. Soon the thread devolves into a discussion on embedding all kinds of media. Think of how boring the web would be if some of the more complicated schemes in that discussion had prevailed over IMG SRC.

[jgrahamc]

Has it really been 14 years? Boy, time flies.

[johnrob]

"No closing tag": nice, I wonder how (non-X) html became so unruly ;)

[pius]

So old school, I love it.