# Make Image act as a hyperlink

**URL:** <https://talk.commonmark.org/t/make-image-act-as-a-hyperlink/2805>\
**Category:** Uncategorized\
**Created:** [May 4, 2018, 12:34pm UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/make-image-act-as-a-hyperlink/2805 "2018-05-04T12:34:23Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 8

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![vas](https://cdn.commonmark.org/user_avatar/talk.commonmark.org/vas/32/1267_2.png) [@vas](https://talk.commonmark.org/u/vas)\
**Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 1:39pm UTC](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/make-image-act-as-a-hyperlink/2805/8 "2018-05-07T13:39:36Z")

</div>

> [@chrisalley](#):
>
> If you think this syntax is hard to read, that’s because it is. And to be honest, I think the more explicit HTML rendering of it is clearer.
> 
> ```auto
> <p>
> <a href=“http://commonmark.org” title=“Redirect to homepage”>
> <img src=“http://commonmark.org/help/images/favicon.png” alt=“homepage” />
> </a>
> </p>
> 
> ```
> 
> In my opinion, we should aim to prevent any further syntax (in extensions) from becoming more complicated than this.

The Markdown _in this case_ is more complicated than the HTML because Markdown optimizes simplicity for the overwhelmingly common case it targets (articles/content, not wrapping web page chrome). A website logo that links to the homepage is typically done in the wrapping template or even in the CSS, not in each page’s content.

HTML is sometimes more optimal for nested markup. Sometimes nesting makes Markdown hard to parse for humans or for machines, as @jgm [has pointed out](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/beyond-markdown/2787). But mostly only in corner cases. Mostly.

So I think the Markdown syntax complexity in this case is fine. This is not an example of a Markdown flaw.

---

_[View the full topic](https://talk.commonmark.org/t/make-image-act-as-a-hyperlink/2805)._