Paul: IMHO you got what I said all wrong, bu this is just IMHO.
> You guys crack me up! You seem to be saying that, of all these > signifiers -- "dog," "chien," [doggy photo], etc. -- it's the one > that is most like a dog, or mostly IS a dog, that deserves to go in > the DT. Err... no. It's the other way around, but thanks for commenting the opposite view. > What, you think the word "dog" is more like an actual dog > than a photograph of a dog? Let me see... no. > For proximity to the real thing, I'll put my > money on the photograph of the dog which is at least a direct > physical reflection of an actual dog. How much money are we talking about? We could get to a deal, you know, got lots of pictures. And if I print the description on some reaaly high quality paper, would you be interested in buying a copy. Phone me. > Until you figure out how to get an actual dog into a web page, all > you have to work with is one representation or another. Now you seem to have understood what I said. > In one dictionary list, "dog" will be the DT and "chien" will be the DD. In > another, > [fidophoto] will be the DT and "My dog Binky" will be the DD. It all has to > do with what > you intend to elucidate. Now you got me right again. Do you scan or read? If you scan try scanning not only the even lines, the odd ones too. Or else... read before answering. Sorry for cracking you. Hope you didn't get hurt. Reading can be dangerous. I really think we can get a business going with the dog photographs. I'm serious here. ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
