Indeed, the book itself is not going to be a current source on web APIs. However, the section about the history of the <img> element is still interesting.
As the tweet which was shared here today mentions, it's now the 30th anniversary of this announcement by Andreessen, but I thought the content here had more depth than the previously-shared tweet, as a meditation on the formation of standards in the wild west web. I specifically liked this assertion by the author (after visiting all the proposed alternatives):
> But none of this answers the original question: why do we have an <img> element? Why not an <icon> element? Or an <include> element? Why not a hyperlink with an include attribute, or some combination of rel values? Why an <img> element? Quite simply, because Marc Andreessen shipped one, and shipping code wins
As the tweet which was shared here today mentions, it's now the 30th anniversary of this announcement by Andreessen, but I thought the content here had more depth than the previously-shared tweet, as a meditation on the formation of standards in the wild west web. I specifically liked this assertion by the author (after visiting all the proposed alternatives):
> But none of this answers the original question: why do we have an <img> element? Why not an <icon> element? Or an <include> element? Why not a hyperlink with an include attribute, or some combination of rel values? Why an <img> element? Quite simply, because Marc Andreessen shipped one, and shipping code wins