Using absolute units in img width tends to fail

[icearch]

Using absolute units in img width tends to fail in a lot of reader apps. They simply ignore that and stretch the img to 100% or original size.

Resizing img in advance kinna hurts it's quality, and pretty annoying. Any good way to fix this?

[j.p.s]

Why not use %, especially since you don't know the PPI of the display?

[JSWolf]

One other option is if the absolute units make the image smaller then it is, resize the image to that size. Then you don't have to use absolute units.

[icearch]

Originally Posted by j.p.s

Why not use %, especially since you don't know the PPI of the display?

Using % can have some other problems in certain reader app, but a lot more acceptable. But I prefer learning more things so I'm asking anyway.

As to ppi, I don't think that's how it's working? px is 1/96 in, have nothing to do with pixel so nothing to do with ppi.

[slm]

Originally Posted by icearch

px is 1/96 in, have nothing to do with pixel so nothing to do with ppi.

Not quite: from https://www.w3schools.com/cssref/css_units.php:

Pixels (px) are relative to the viewing device. For low-dpi devices, 1px is one device pixel (dot) of the display. For printers and high resolution screens 1px implies multiple device pixels

I don't know that many modern readers or screens have less than 96ppi, so in practice, I guess, 1/96 in is likely to be accurate.

[Jellby]

Originally Posted by j.p.s

Why not use %, especially since you don't know the PPI of the display?

Because if you want 3cm, % doesn't help. You don't know the ppi, and you don't know the screen size. But if you do know you want 3cm, you should be able to say 3cm, and the device should know what to do with it.