|
|
Posted by Toby Inkster on 11/06/50 11:35
Els wrote:
> Sounds like we're talking about two different things. A direct link
> with an href to an image is one thing, but I thought we were
> discussing placing someone else's images in a page through an <img>
> element,
So this is fine in your books?
<a href="http://yoursite.example.com/image.jpeg">Image</a>
But this is not?
<img src="http://yoursite.example.com/image.jpeg" alt="Image">
(The two are rendered almost identically in Lynx, given the right
options.)
How about this?
<a id="foo" href="http://yoursite.example.com/image.jpeg">Image</a>
<script>
var i = new Image();
var h = document.getElementById('foo');
i.src = h.href;
i.alt = h.innerHTML;
h.href = '';
h.appendChild(i);
</script>
And what if that Javascript isn't on the page, but is instead run by the
visitor? (cf. Mozilla's GreaseMonkey extension, Opera's native User
Javascript capability, "bookmarklets" in any Javascript-capable browser.)
Where exactly do you draw the line? And why do you need to draw a line at
all? If you want people to view your images, why does it matter what HTML
element I use to link to them? Every visitor who views your image is
going to use X kilobytes of your bandwidth, whether I use A or IMG.
> passing the picture off as one's own, and wasting my bandwidth.
Now that's not an issue with "theft", but one of passing-off: an issue of
copyright violation.
But if I write:
<p>Here is a great picture that Els took:
<img src="http://yoursite.example.com/image.jpeg" alt="Image"></p>
then how am I passing it off as my own?
--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|