HTML Validation

The “name” attribute on the “img” element is obsolete. Use the “id” attribute instead.

About This HTML Issue

The warning regarding the use of the name attribute on the img element arises because the name attribute is considered obsolete in modern HTML. Historically, name was used to identify form controls and some other elements, but now it’s replaced by more standardized attributes like id.

To resolve this issue, replace the name attribute with the id attribute. The id attribute provides a unique identifier for the element within the document, which can be utilized for styling, scripting, or linking using fragment identifiers.

Here is an example of how to make this change:

HTML with obsolete name attribute:

<img src="example.jpg" name="myImage" alt="Descriptive text">

Updated HTML using the id attribute:

<img src="example.jpg" id="myImage" alt="Descriptive text">

In this modification:

The name="myImage" is replaced with id="myImage".
The remaining attributes like src and alt are retained for specifying the image source and providing alternative text, respectively.

The id attribute should be unique within the document, which ensures that JavaScript or CSS can target the element efficiently.

Learn more:

Last reviewed: March 31, 2025

Was this guide helpful?

Find issues like this automatically

Rocket Validator scans thousands of pages in seconds, detecting HTML issues across your entire site.

Start Free Trial See Pricing

Ready to validate your site?

Find Accessibility and HTML issues in your large sites, in seconds. Get your site scanned by Axe Core and W3C Validator with just one click.

Pro Trial Free Trial

Reading time

1 min read

Category

HTML Validation

Engine

W3C Validator

Last reviewed

March 31, 2025

Resources

Related W3C Validator Issues (68)

The “name” attribute on the “option” element is obsolete. Use the “id” attribute instead.

The <option> element no longer accepts a name attribute, which is now obsolete.

Example:

<select id="pet-select">
    <option value="">--Please choose an option--</option>
    <option value="dog">Dog</option>
    <option value="cat">Cat</option>
    <option value="hamster">Hamster</option>
</select>

The “name” attribute is obsolete. Consider putting an “id” attribute on the nearest container instead.

In the days before HTML5, named anchors were used as a way to provide a link to a specific section of a document, for example:

<h2>
  <a name="section-5">Section 5</a>
</h2>

Now in HTML5, the name attribute is obsolete for <a> tags, and instead, you can use the id attribute of any element (not just <a>) as a way to navigate directly to it, for example:

<h2 id="section-5">Section 5</h2>

A “source” element that has a following sibling “source” element or “img” element with a “srcset” attribute must have a “media” attribute and/or “type” attribute.

A <source> element inside a <picture> that is followed by another <source> or an <img> with srcset must include a media and/or type attribute.

The <source> element is used inside <picture> for responsive images, allowing different resources to be loaded based on conditions such as viewport width (media) or image format (type). According to the HTML standard, when multiple <source> elements are present (or a following <img> with srcset), each <source> must provide a media and/or type attribute so the browser can choose the appropriate resource based on those hints.

Without media or type, the browser cannot distinguish when to use each source, which can lead to validation errors and unexpected rendering behavior.

Incorrect example (causes the validator error):

<picture>
  <source srcset="image1.webp">
  <source srcset="image2.jpg">
  <img alt="" src="fallback.jpg" srcset="fallback2x.jpg 2x">
</picture>

Correct examples (fixing the error):

<picture>
  <source srcset="image1.webp" type="image/webp">
  <source srcset="image2.jpg" type="image/jpeg">
  <img alt="" src="fallback.jpg" srcset="fallback2x.jpg 2x">
</picture>

<picture>
  <source srcset="image-small.jpg" media="(max-width: 600px)">
  <source srcset="image-large.jpg" media="(min-width: 601px)">
  <img alt="" src="fallback.jpg" srcset="fallback2x.jpg 2x">
</picture>

By specifying the media and/or type attributes for each <source>, you satisfy the HTML standard and resolve the W3C validator issue.

An ID must not contain whitespace

An “img” element must have an “alt” attribute, except under certain conditions. For details, consult guidance on providing text alternatives for images.

<img> tags, used to include images on a document, require an alt attribute to describe the contents of the image. This is essential for users that cannot see the image (like screen reader users), or as an alternate text when the image cannot be displayed. Example:

<img src="photo.jpg" alt="Person holding a cat" />

An “img” element which has an “alt” attribute whose value is the empty string must not have a “role” attribute.

Attribute “name” not allowed on element “meta” at this point.

meta
name

A <meta> tag has been found that is either malformed, or in a bad place within the document. Check its attributes and context.

For example, the following HTML contains a valid <meta> tag that is raising an issue because of bad context, caused by an <img> tag that shouldn’t be there:

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html lang="">
  <head>
    <title>Test</title>
    <img src="photo.jpg" alt="A smiling cat" />
    <meta name="description" content="Description of this page" />
  </head>
  <body>
    <p>Some content</p>
  </body>
</html>

If we fix that document and move the <img> tag within the body, the issue raised about <meta> disappears because it’s now in a valid context:

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html lang="">
  <head>
    <title>Test</title>
    <meta name="description" content="Description of this page" />
  </head>
  <body>
    <p>Some content</p>
    <img src="photo.jpg" alt="A smiling cat" />
  </body>
</html>

Bad start tag in “img” in “noscript” in “head”.

A start tag for <img> has been found inside a <noscript> section within the <head>, where it’s not allowed. Consider moving it to the <body> section.

The HTML <noscript> element defines a section of HTML to be inserted if a script type on the page is unsupported or if scripting is currently turned off in the browser.

When JavaScript is disabled, the content inside <noscript> will be used instead, so this content must fit within its parent section. As an <img> tag is not allowed inside <head>, this will raise an issue. Instead, consider moving the <noscript> part to the <body> section.

This issue is often related to 3rd party tracking pixels like the Facebook or LinkedIn conversion tracking pixels. For example, the Facebook pixel instructions tell you to insert it like this:

<html>
  <head>
    <script>
       ...some script...
    </script>
    <noscript>
       <img src="..." />
     </noscript>
  </head>
  <body>
     ...
  </body>
</html>

Instead, consider moving the <noscript> part inside the <body>, where the <img> makes sense to be inserted:

<html>
  <head>
    <script>
       ...some script...
    </script>
  </head>
  <body>
     ...
     <noscript>
       <img src="..." />
     </noscript>
  </body>
</html>

Bad value “100%” for attribute “height” on element “img”: Expected a digit but saw “%” instead.

img
height

The W3C HTML Validator issue you encountered indicates that the value of the height attribute for an <img> element is set to “100%”, which is not allowed in HTML. The height attribute must be a specific digit that represents the height in pixels (e.g., “150”), rather than a percentage or any other unit.

How to Fix the Issue

To resolve this issue, you need to specify a numeric value for the height attribute instead. If you want the image to occupy a certain percentage of the container, use CSS instead of the height attribute.

Example of Incorrect HTML

Here is an example that causes the validation issue:

<img src="image.jpg" height="100%" alt="Example Image">

Corrected HTML Using Pixel Values

To correct the issue, replace the percentage with a pixel value:

<img src="image.jpg" height="200" alt="Example Image">

Alternative: Using CSS for Responsive Design

If you want the image to scale responsively and occupy 100% of the width of its container, consider using CSS:

<style>
  .responsive-img {
      width: 100%;
      height: auto; /* Maintains aspect ratio */
  }
</style>

<img src="image.jpg" class="responsive-img" alt="Example Image">

Summary

Do not use percentage values for the height attribute of <img> tags.
Use pixel values for fixed dimensions.
For responsive design, use CSS to set the dimensions instead.

Bad value “auto” for attribute “sizes” on element “img”: Bad CSS number token: Expected a minus sign or a digit but saw “a” instead at “auto”.

The sizes attribute specifies the size of the image when it is displayed on different devices.

The error message is saying that the value auto is not a valid value for the sizes attribute.

To fix this issue, you need to replace the value auto with a valid size. You can use a width descriptor or a media query to specify the size for different device widths.

Here’s an example of using a width descriptor:

<img src="example.jpg" sizes="(max-width: 600px) 100vw, 50vw" />

This example sets the size of the image to 100% of the viewport width when the device width is less than or equal to 600px, and 50% of the viewport width for larger device widths.

Alternatively, you can remove the sizes attribute altogether and let the browser decide the best size for the image based on the viewport size.

<img src="example.jpg" />

If you do this, the browser will use the default sizes value of 100vw and will scale the image accordingly.

Ready to validate your sites?
Start your free trial today.

Pro Trial Free Trial