Yes, more delays.
Rather than another long-winded post, I figured that this time I’d just give an example of how HTML approaches things compared to Word. Hopefully this will illustrate why I’m such a strong proponent of the former.
Specifying an image in HTML
<img src="filename.png" width="66%">
Specifying an image in docx (method 1)
<w:drawing> <wp:inline> <wp:extent cx="5270500" cy="3513667"/> <wp:docPr id="1" name="Picture 1"/> <wp:cNvGraphicFramePr> <a:graphicFrameLocks noChangeAspect="1"/> </wp:cNvGraphicFramePr> <a:graphic> <a:graphicData uri="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture"> <dpct:pic> <dpct:nvPicPr> <dpct:cNvPr id="0" name="image"/> <dpct:cNvPicPr/> </dpct:nvPicPr> <dpct:blipFill> <a:blip r:embed="rId1"/> <a:stretch> <a:fillRect/> </a:stretch> </dpct:blipFill> <dpct:spPr> <a:xfrm> <a:off x="0" y="0"/> <a:ext cx="5270500" cy="3513667"/> </a:xfrm> <a:prstGeom prst="rect"/> </dpct:spPr> </dpct:pic> </a:graphicData> </a:graphic> </wp:inline> </w:drawing>
Specifying an image in docx (method 2)
<w:pict> <v:shapetype id="_x0000_t75" coordsize="21600,21600" o:spt="75" o:preferrelative="t" path="m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe" filled="f" stroked="f"> <v:stroke joinstyle="miter"/> <v:formulas> <v:f eqn="if lineDrawn pixelLineWidth 0"/> <v:f eqn="sum @0 1 0"/> <v:f eqn="sum 0 0 @1"/> <v:f eqn="prod @2 1 2"/> <v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelWidth"/> <v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelHeight"/> <v:f eqn="sum @0 0 1"/> <v:f eqn="prod @6 1 2"/> <v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelWidth"/> <v:f eqn="sum @8 21600 0"/> <v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelHeight"/> <v:f eqn="sum @10 21600 0"/> </v:formulas> <v:path o:extrusionok="f" gradientshapeok="t" o:connecttype="rect"/> <o:lock v:ext="edit" aspectratio="t"/> </v:shapetype> <v:shape id="_x0000_i1025" style="width:96pt;height:64pt" type="#_x0000_t75"> <v:imagedata r:id="rId4" o:title="min"/> </v:shape> </w:pict>