Re: How Do I Embed Music............

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Headless, Jun 22, 2003.

  1. Headless

    Headless Guest

    Andrew H. Carter <> wrote:

    ><analogy>
    >Correct me if I'm wrong, but generally a program written for
    >Win3.1/Win 95/Win98/etc... can be read by each of it's successors with
    >rare/some exceptions, but by and large it holds true: Win 98 can do
    >Win 95 proggies, but can Win 3.1 do Win 95 proggies? Can Win 95 do Win
    >987 proggies? Probably not.
    ></analogy>


    You keep on trying to avoid the real issue here, embedding audio/video
    via the <embed> tag or via _any_ other method is fundamentally flawed
    and unnecessarily restricts the availability of content to a subset of
    visitors.


    Headless
     
    Headless, Jun 22, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. On Sun, 22 Jun 2003 22:20:53 +0100, Headless <>
    wrote:

    >You keep on trying to avoid the real issue here, embedding audio/video
    >via the <embed> tag or via _any_ other method is fundamentally flawed
    >and unnecessarily restricts the availability of content to a subset of
    >visitors.
    >



    I get it, so the issue is to just provide a link so that they may
    download the audio/video or not as embeding slows down the page from
    loading.

    And by continuation of that, the issue is to only use a browser that
    does text only (Lynx, or turn off images) as the use of graphics and
    colors takes away from the reading experience. But if we do that,
    what do we do about the reading impaired? Sure we can use the tag
    attribute that enables the text to be read:

    <HEAD>
    <STYLE TYPE=text/css MEDIA="All">
    blah, blah, blah
    </STYLE>
    </HEAD>

    And in order to not discriminate, all pages should be adjusted for
    that, like all/most driveup ATM machines have Braille instructions.

    So when we get down to it, you object to advertising: background WAVs,
    MIDIs, SWFs. If you are like my brother you also probably turn
    down/mute the volume on a TV when a commercial comes on. Don't you
    just hate it when a tune sticks in your head and you can't get rid of
    it?

    Sincerely,

    Andrew H. Carter
     
    Andrew H. Carter, Jun 22, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Headless

    Whitecrest Guest

    In article <>,
    says...

    > And in order to not discriminate, all pages should be adjusted for
    > that, like all/most driveup ATM machines have Braille instructions.


    Albeit with a touch of sarcasm, I think you finally understand the
    fundamentally flawed "Every page for every human" theory....
    --
    Whitecrest Entertainment
    www.whitecrestent.com
     
    Whitecrest, Jun 23, 2003
    #3
  4. On Sun, 22 Jun 2003 21:42:07 -0400, Whitecrest <>
    wrote:

    >In article <>,
    > says...
    >
    >> And in order to not discriminate, all pages should be adjusted for
    >> that, like all/most driveup ATM machines have Braille instructions.

    >
    >Albeit with a touch of sarcasm, I think you finally understand the
    >fundamentally flawed "Every page for every human" theory....



    Oh, I know that and have known that, but if you go with the basics,
    HTML 1 (no coffee (Javascript), no artwork/windows/mirrors (frames))
    and don't advance to 4, then you will reach the lion's share of the
    audience. Give the users an option(s) basic or advanced, bi-plane or
    SR-71 Blackbird, at the start page.


    Sincerely,

    Andrew H. Carter
     
    Andrew H. Carter, Jun 23, 2003
    #4
  5. Headless

    Headless Guest

    Andrew H. Carter <> wrote:

    >>You keep on trying to avoid the real issue here, embedding audio/video
    >>via the <embed> tag or via _any_ other method is fundamentally flawed
    >>and unnecessarily restricts the availability of content to a subset of
    >>visitors.

    >
    >I get it, so the issue is to just provide a link


    Indeed. Hyperlinking is not limited to text links, provide a graphically
    rich interface if you want.

    >so that they may download the audio/video


    Or use redirector files to stream (preferably with an option to
    download).

    >or not as embeding slows down the page from loading.


    You were told about more serious problems, ignoring that doesn't make it
    go away.

    >And by continuation of that, the issue is to only use a browser that
    >does text only (Lynx, or turn off images) as the use of graphics and
    >colors takes away from the reading experience. But if we do that,
    >what do we do about the reading impaired? Sure we can use the tag
    >attribute that enables the text to be read:
    >
    ><HEAD>
    ><STYLE TYPE=text/css MEDIA="All">
    >blah, blah, blah
    ></STYLE>
    ></HEAD>
    >
    >And in order to not discriminate, all pages should be adjusted for
    >that, like all/most driveup ATM machines have Braille instructions.


    Turning to ridicule does not obscure the fact that you've failed to
    provide a single argument in favor of embedding or a single argument
    against linking.


    Headless
     
    Headless, Jun 23, 2003
    #5
  6. Headless

    Isofarro Guest

    Andrew H. Carter wrote:

    > but if you go with the basics,
    > HTML 1 (no coffee (Javascript), no artwork/windows/mirrors (frames))
    > and don't advance to 4, then you will reach the lion's share of the
    > audience.


    Advancing to HTML 4 or XHTML does no lose any of the "lion's share of the
    audience". Neither does adding artwork.


    > Give the users an option(s) basic or advanced, bi-plane or
    > SR-71 Blackbird, at the start page.


    Providing two websites where one will do does not make economic sense. When
    things get tight, guess which version loses out?


    --
    Iso.
    FAQs: http://html-faq.com http://alt-html.org http://allmyfaqs.com/
    Recommended Hosting: http://www.affordablehost.com/
    Web Standards: http://www.webstandards.org/
     
    Isofarro, Jun 23, 2003
    #6
  7. Headless

    Whitecrest Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > Turning to ridicule does not obscure the fact that you've failed to
    > provide a single argument in favor of embedding or a single argument
    > against linking.


    You are absolutely right. If you want to reach the absolute largest
    possible number of people you can, no matter what they use to see your
    page and your content, (not taking into consideration if they would even
    buy the product or not), then you can not not embed, you must publish in
    some generic format, and can not ever use any JavaScript, or flash for
    anything essential. I completely agree with that, and have never said
    anything to the contrary (hmmm... never say never?)

    But, if a page like that doesn't work with your target audience, (the
    ones that will buy your product) then you need to consider using the
    tools that will work. And you need to design the page in a way that
    turns them on, works with them, and makes them buy (this includes
    branding). If that takes Flash, embedded video, dhtml menus, then that
    is what you need to use. If my customers tend to like flash, then they
    will get flash. Because if I don't give it to them, then they will go
    to my competitors who has flash.
    <sarcasm>
    But I will be happy that my page could be seen by every single person on
    the web (if they wanted to see it) as I go out of business. </sarcasm>

    Since we disagree on this basic premise, we will both go on our ways,
    game fully employed and happy in our own knowledge of what the other
    does not understand....

    I am not arguing with you, I am only stating another way of thinking.
    And an opinion (your's mine, or anyone else's) can never be wrong.

    --
    Whitecrest Entertainment
    www.whitecrestent.com
     
    Whitecrest, Jun 24, 2003
    #7
  8. On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 17:17:44 +0000, Isofarro
    <> wrote:

    >Advancing to HTML 4 or XHTML does no lose any of the "lion's share of the
    >audience". Neither does adding artwork.
    >


    True, provided that everybody chooses to upgrade. But inreality, not
    everybody chooses to upgrade, or they do so on a different time
    schedule.


    >
    >> Give the users an option(s) basic or advanced, bi-plane or
    >> SR-71 Blackbird, at the start page.

    >
    >Providing two websites where one will do does not make economic sense. When
    >things get tight, guess which version loses out?


    I have one website, located at http://home.earthlink.net/~acarterchef,
    but have two different versions of it, through the use of text/HTML
    pages sharing the same images. The big "waste of space" are audio and
    graphic files. text files are rather small in comparison.

    Sincerely,

    Andrew H. Carter
     
    Andrew H. Carter, Jun 24, 2003
    #8
  9. Headless

    Isofarro Guest

    Isofarro, Jun 24, 2003
    #9
  10. Headless

    Isofarro Guest

    Whitecrest wrote:

    > If you want to reach the absolute largest
    > possible number of people you can, no matter what they use to see your
    > page and your content, (not taking into consideration if they would even
    > buy the product or not), then you can not not embed, you must publish in
    > some generic format, and can not ever use any JavaScript, or flash for
    > anything essential. I completely agree with that,


    No surprise there, considering its the most discredited myth against
    accessibility.


    --
    Iso.
    FAQs: http://html-faq.com http://alt-html.org http://allmyfaqs.com/
    Recommended Hosting: http://www.affordablehost.com/
    Web Standards: http://www.webstandards.org/
     
    Isofarro, Jun 24, 2003
    #10
  11. On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 20:11:54 +0000, Isofarro
    <> wrote:

    >Andrew H. Carter wrote:
    >
    >> On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 17:17:44 +0000, Isofarro
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>Advancing to HTML 4 or XHTML does no lose any of the "lion's share of the
    >>>audience". Neither does adding artwork.
    >>>

    >>
    >> True, provided that everybody chooses to upgrade.

    >
    >Nobody needs to upgrade.



    How many web browsers are on the market and how many of those browsers
    are current/up to date? Lynx is a nice text only browser. it has
    some security issues, but it also does not get hijacked like IE. For
    instance there are no auto redirects.

    With Lynx, framed pages do not get displayed, but it is still possible
    to navigate the links. As far as background colors, I've as yet been
    able to get it configured (if it is possible) to display different
    background colors.

    So, it might be said that I would have to "upgrade" to get those
    things available.

    Sincerely,

    Andrew H. Carter
     
    Andrew H. Carter, Jul 6, 2003
    #11
  12. Headless

    Isofarro Guest

    Andrew H. Carter wrote:

    > On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 20:11:54 +0000, Isofarro
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>Andrew H. Carter wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 17:17:44 +0000, Isofarro
    >>> <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Advancing to HTML 4 or XHTML does no lose any of the "lion's share of
    >>>>the audience". Neither does adding artwork.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> True, provided that everybody chooses to upgrade.

    >>
    >>Nobody needs to upgrade.

    >
    >
    > How many web browsers are on the market and how many of those browsers
    > are current/up to date? Lynx is a nice text only browser.


    The current version of Lynx is newer than than IE6.



    --
    Iso.
    FAQs: http://html-faq.com http://alt-html.org http://allmyfaqs.com/
    Recommended Hosting: http://www.affordablehost.com/
    Web Standards: http://www.webstandards.org/
     
    Isofarro, Jul 6, 2003
    #12
  13. On Sun, 06 Jul 2003 00:11:27 +0000, Andrew H. Carter wrote:

    > With Lynx, framed pages do not get displayed, but it is still possible
    > to navigate the links.


    You really ought to download "Links". It's a text mode that can handle
    tables and frames properly!

    Screenshot showing Links' interpretation of frames at Google Groups:

    http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/scratch/links-frameset.png

    I'm not sure which version of Links was the first to support frames, but
    I'm using Links 2.1pre11.

    The Links home page is here:

    http://artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~mikulas/links/

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS | mailto: | pgp:0x6A2A7D39
    aim:inka80 | icq:6622880 | yahoo:tobyink | jabber:
    http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/ | "You've got spam!"
    playing://(nothing)
     
    Toby A Inkster, Jul 6, 2003
    #13
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Mike Chan

    Music

    Mike Chan, Aug 19, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    560
    Jurjen de Groot
    Aug 20, 2003
  2. =?Utf-8?B?ZGhucml2ZXJzaWRl?=

    wma / drm / music download theory help!

    =?Utf-8?B?ZGhucml2ZXJzaWRl?=, Mar 6, 2005, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    372
    Scott Allen
    Mar 6, 2005
  3. SwissCheese

    Re: How Do I Embed Music............

    SwissCheese, Jun 26, 2003, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    1,747
  4. DU
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    6,483
    Whitecrest
    Jul 1, 2003
  5. AllYou!
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    644
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard_Talbot?=
    Apr 10, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page