From: Steve Pugh said:
Newsgroups: alt.html
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 21:08:55 +0000
Subject: Re: Force FONT
Again?
The poster you are replying to sees the www as being something used by many
people, many of whom would appreciate the type of communication being
discussed and if many of these can get "the message" then it looks absurd to
say that it is the wrong medium. What do you want folk to do, hire full page
ads in newspapers, send hard copy to people all over the world because not
all the folks on the www will "get" the particular message? No need to
explain further what you "meant".
Then the message can not be communicated on the WWW. It can be
communicated on some subset of the WWW and the techniques I outlined
can be used to reach various of those subsets.
Yes, yes, you make it clear enough what the story is given one reads all
your qualifications... but it is simply provocative - in Australia, we have
an expression: "being a smart arse" - to say "Then the message can not be
communicated on the WWW." Because it is simply not true on any ordinary
reading of these words. If a whole bunch of people all over the world can
get the message then that may be good enough for the messenger. Maybe it is
not good enough for you. But that is quite a different thing.
Then use an image. But don't expect everyone to be able to see it.
Presumably the alt attribute will be empty as users who can't see the
image can't get the content here at all?
Presumably to you. If there were really no content beyond "the look", the
alt tag would still be able to convey something about it just as alt tags
often do for pictures without being any real kind of substitution for them.
Perhaps you were being light-hearted and such analysis is somewhat
humourless. But please forgive me as I am testing a theory that you are a
robot put out by W3C, with counter-suggestive programming, sarcasm, some
humour and so on, all built in along with an understandably good grasp of
technical matters.
snip
dorayme