I don’t think that’s a good idea. Firstly, I guess that these dimensionless values are meant to be in pixels. Which is not a sensible choice for sizes nowadays: while 100 pixels are a third of the screen width on an iPhone, they’re only about an eighth on an ipad and even less on the desktop. Why wouldn’t I want to see the image larger on a larger screen?
Secondly, such a modification breaks compatibility. Markdown is already fractured enough as it is. Introducing another “feature” is not helping.
Thirdly, the solution is already there, and it is called CSS.
width=“xxxx” … sets the size with xxxx pixels style=“float:yyyy” … sets the float as “center, right, left” … cent is text above and below, right text is left of image, left text is right of image.
I just found that some other MD-syntax of Obsidian is explicitly re-used in DT.
(Help-Document on transclusion: “It also supports the Obsidian syntax, e.g., ![[Chapter 2.md]].”)
So, I would second @zeltak ´s request to do likewise around image re-sizing, as this would very much uncomplicated shared use of resized images in some interoperability scenarios (not only Obsidian, but including it).
Just a thought, this may work in a more responsive manner if the image sizing unit was based on percentages of the window width instead of being explicit pixels.
Thx for sharing & contribuing that attentive thought.
I’d also prefer that – in theory.
As far as I am aware, Obsidian-style resizing (or any MD-flavor allowing for this pipe-syntax, like Tangent Notes) only deals in pixels, and not in percentages.
What it does allow is specifying only width value.
As much as I’d love that, the more central motivation is to strengthen interoperability btw different venerable Markdown-capable apps in such a central aspect as controlling image size (and thus a modest form of ‘layout’).
My understanding is that this was also the motif to allow for particular way that Obsidian syntaxes transclusion in DT.