[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think the primary issue you have here is the assertion that Images,
however artistic they may be, qualify as 'data'. I cannot see that
connection, and therefore cannot agree with the use of a table.
Further, the 'relationship' between two images may change if they are
moved, but the 'meaning' of those images does not change, ever.
Mike
Hi Mike,
We're getting way OT here (interesting though it is!) but the 'meaning'
of an image is dependent entirely upon the context in which it is
seen/displayed. Consider an image showing a pretty landscape with no
title. Then duplicate it, and title it 'Picture of radiation falling
over the landscape'. Then title it 'Area where the body of John Doe was
found' etc etc. See what I mean?
--
Bob
www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
