An image posted on a website is not legal proof of anything.
If the state of Hawaii were to provide a certified copy of his birth certificate to a court of law in a legal proceeding, that would be considered real evidence.
But Obama has had lawyers in dozens of cases arguing there is no legal requirement to have to submit such a document.
Hawaii has only confirmed it has documents relating to Obama in their files. We don't know what they say, because Obama has not consented to allowing Hawaii to releasing that information.
From what the DOH has said already we know that what they have doesn’t qualify as prima facie evidence. And the logical explanation of further things they’ve said is that his birth certificate was not completed until 2006 when Obama provided a document which gave the missing info - and the only reason for the info to be missing was that neither Obama nor his mother were in Hawaii to have a doctor complete the certificate.
IOW, what Hawaii has certainly doesn’t prove a Hawaii birth - and very likely DISPROVES a Hawaii birth.