Maybe a -1 could be passed to height or width to simulate "auto".
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Héctor A <[email protected]> wrote: > I guess it's this same issue: > > > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/21132203/flash-spark-image-width-100-height-auto > > So still no workaround in pure MXML? Seems a bit of a letdown, would be > nice to have and may even be common sense. I'd say we all needed it at > least once, but I've always resorted to use code. > > On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Héctor A <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Sorry, 320/160DPI. Anyway, that's not the issue, and it's seemingly >> working as expected. >> >> On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Héctor A <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> It also seemed strange to me. It's because of DPIs, the images were done >>> for 360DPI, targetting 180DPI. >>> >>> On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 11:06 AM, Tom Chiverton <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On 07/05/15 10:01, Héctor A wrote: >>>> >>>>> scaleX="0.5" scaleY="0.5" smooth="true" width="50%" >>>>> >>>> >>>> What's the reasoning behind giving a scale factor for both axis as well >>>> as a width and expecting the height to adjust ? >>>> >>>> Tom >>>> >>> >>> >> >
