Survey or poll on Internet dislikes

D

dorayme

Yes, they are! They link to bigger images. Just because they also serve
an aesthetic purpose in their own right does not negate their utility.

A thumbnail is roughly the size of a thumb. One can stretch this
a bit maybe. But not so that all meaning is lost.

If you were right, any pic, even say a 800x700 one that linked to
an even larger one (a not so rare technique used to give folk
bigger without unnecessarily using up bandwidth from the start)
would be a thumbnail.

This is sometimes called a reductio ad absurdum and will be
further explained to you by Officer "Bud' White before he gives
you his usual special treatment that is very far from the Roman
mind. What you will get is especially Californian.
 
N

Neredbojias

To further the education of mankind, dorayme
A thumbnail is roughly the size of a thumb. One can stretch this
a bit maybe. But not so that all meaning is lost.

Okay, so call it a toenail.
If you were right, any pic, even say a 800x700 one that linked to
an even larger one (a not so rare technique used to give folk
bigger without unnecessarily using up bandwidth from the start)
would be a thumbnail.

I am and it is.
This is sometimes called a reductio ad absurdum and will be
further explained to you by Officer "Bud' White before he gives
you his usual special treatment that is very far from the Roman
mind. What you will get is especially Californian.

I call it noodleo meus activo maximo est. (This is idiogrammatic Latin for
"using your head.")
 
D

dorayme

If you were right, any pic, even say a 800x700 one that linked to
an even larger one (a not so rare technique used to give folk
bigger without unnecessarily using up bandwidth from the start)
would be a thumbnail.

I am and it is.[/QUOTE]

You are not right and it isn't. It is a ridiculous, careless and
clumsy way of thinking and using words. It is bad enough that we
all do it in the heat of writing, especially to ngs. But you
choose to make it a practice, even when you have time to think
about it.
 
N

Neredbojias

To further the education of mankind, dorayme
I am and it is.

You are not right and it isn't.[/QUOTE]

I am right and it is.
It is a ridiculous, careless and
clumsy way of thinking and using words.

Stating the facts succinctly? I don't think so.
It is bad enough that we
all do it in the heat of writing, especially to ngs.

I don't get hot writing.
But you
choose to make it a practice, even when you have time to think
about it.

Practice makes perfect. Opinions will inevitably vary so there is little
reason to vacillate in the support of one's own. Notice that the method,
however, does not imply that I or anyone is always right.
 
D

dorayme

It is a ridiculous, careless and
clumsy way of thinking and using words.

Stating the facts succinctly? I don't think so.[/QUOTE]

How can you think this? No matter what size a pic is, if it links
to an even bigger one, it is, according to you, a thumbnail. And
you persist in this opinion because of something else, not
because it is a fact (which it is not and this having nothing to
do with me whatever). What this thing is can only be found out in
one way and only by one man on this whole earth. You know the
way, and you know the man. Public decorum allows me only to
mention the latter, Officer "Bud" White.

(Now this, Mr Korpela, is babbling!)
 
N

Neredbojias

To further the education of mankind, dorayme
Stating the facts succinctly? I don't think so.

How can you think this? No matter what size a pic is, if it links
to an even bigger one, it is, according to you, a thumbnail.
Well...yeah.

And
you persist in this opinion because of something else, not
because it is a fact (which it is not and this having nothing to
do with me whatever).[/QUOTE]

I persist because I believe it. Would you have me say, "Oh, no, right,
it's not a thumb because a thumb is much smaller than that unless we're
talking about King Kong or a giant, etc.," when I believed just the
opposite?
What this thing is can only be found out in
one way and only by one man on this whole earth.

A web page thumbnail, to me, is simply a representation of content, usually
more detailed content, to which it is linked. Size doesn't matter, it's
the quality of being a token or symbol that counts. Feel free to disagree,
but that is how _I_ interpret the term.
You know the
way, and you know the man. Public decorum allows me only to
mention the latter, Officer "Bud" White.

(Now this, Mr Korpela, is babbling!)

You don't seem as cranky as you did last night. Been talking to Luigi?
 
D

dorayme

A web page thumbnail, to me, is simply a representation of content, usually
more detailed content, to which it is linked. Size doesn't matter, it's
the quality of being a token or symbol that counts. Feel free to disagree,
but that is how _I_ interpret the term.

Size and context matter. If you have just one pic on a page which
is quite big (say 800 x 400) and it links to an even bigger one
(for printing or really huge or high defn monitors), it is not a
thumbnail. Thumbnails are small pics about the size of thumbs
(and there is some leeway here, I have already admired your
robust implementation of this to some extent) on a page that link
to bigger ones that can be seen more clearly.
 
N

Neredbojias

To further the education of mankind, dorayme
Size and context matter. If you have just one pic on a page which
is quite big (say 800 x 400) and it links to an even bigger one
(for printing or really huge or high defn monitors), it is not a
thumbnail. Thumbnails are small pics about the size of thumbs
(and there is some leeway here, I have already admired your
robust implementation of this to some extent) on a page that link
to bigger ones that can be seen more clearly.

I will concede that there could be scenarios (such as the one you
illustrated) wherein calling the linker image a "thumbnail" might be a
stretch, but other than that, shall we agree to disagree? In all honesty,
I don't care what they're called; "thumb/thumbnail" just seems to be a
convenient way to term such images.
 
S

Stewart Gordon

Neredbojias said:
I simply admired the manner in which you listed several caveats of popups
and wondered if you were up to the challenge of responding similarly when
the subject was a bit more perverse.

You mean like this:

- Are the women you're talking about friendly?

- Do the women you're talking about keep their word?

Hmm....

Stewart.

--
-----BEGIN META GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 1
gc
------END META GEEK CODE BLOCK------

My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox. Please keep replies on
the 'group where everyone may benefit.
 
D

dorayme

I will concede that there could be scenarios (such as the one you
illustrated) wherein calling the linker image a "thumbnail" might be a
stretch, but other than that, shall we agree to disagree? In all honesty,
I don't care what they're called; "thumb/thumbnail" just seems to be a
convenient way to term such images.

It is not that I mind about what you call what. It is that the
nature of the object being called seems to be misunderstood. The
essential feature of a thumbnail is that it is but a slightly
informative link to 'the real thing' as it were. When you start
calling pics that are pretty adequate in themselves thumbnails
even though the website maker has provided further
'enhancements', imo, you are starting to lose site of the main
idea.

It is like calling someone's home or car, a "first" home or car
because there are just so much better ones that folk seem to
manage to get or want as they live on... even when it might be
some poor sod's 8th!

[yeah, ok, I am thinking of my car... :)]
 
S

Steven Saunderson

I don't care what they're called; "thumb/thumbnail" just seems to be a
convenient way to term such images.

I hit this naming problem with 'large' thumbnails recently. I now call
them previews.
 
N

Neredbojias

I hit this naming problem with 'large' thumbnails recently. I now call
them previews.

Ah, that sounds good. I will try to remember the term without slipping
back into my old bad habits like I usually do.
 
N

Neredbojias

To further the education of mankind, dorayme
I will concede that there could be scenarios (such as the one you
illustrated) wherein calling the linker image a "thumbnail" might be
a stretch, but other than that, shall we agree to disagree? In all
honesty, I don't care what they're called; "thumb/thumbnail" just
seems to be a convenient way to term such images.

It is not that I mind about what you call what. It is that the
nature of the object being called seems to be misunderstood. The
essential feature of a thumbnail is that it is but a slightly
informative link to 'the real thing' as it were. When you start
calling pics that are pretty adequate in themselves thumbnails
even though the website maker has provided further
'enhancements', imo, you are starting to lose site of the main
idea.

It is like calling someone's home or car, a "first" home or car
because there are just so much better ones that folk seem to
manage to get or want as they live on... even when it might be
some poor sod's 8th!

[yeah, ok, I am thinking of my car... :)]

I just got a great idea! How about if we call large thumbnails "previews"
to prevent any disharmonious associational confusion with the main image?
This would be a discrete term used to indicate the image you see is more
than a thumb but less than the full-fledged image/content it links to.

Don't know why I didn't think of this before...
 
N

Neredbojias

To further the education of mankind, Stewart Gordon
You mean like this:

- Are the women you're talking about friendly?

- Do the women you're talking about keep their word?

Hmm....

Sort of but I was looking for more descriptive warnings like "Marriage can
lead to the usage of earmuffs even in warm weather," or "When a woman says
'I do' it's just about the last time she does," etc.
 
D

dorayme

To further the education of mankind, dorayme
I will concede that there could be scenarios (such as the one you
illustrated) wherein calling the linker image a "thumbnail" might be
a stretch, but other than that, shall we agree to disagree? In all
honesty, I don't care what they're called; "thumb/thumbnail" just
seems to be a convenient way to term such images.

It is not that I mind about what you call what. It is that the
nature of the object being called seems to be misunderstood. The
essential feature of a thumbnail is that it is but a slightly
informative link to 'the real thing' as it were. When you start
calling pics that are pretty adequate in themselves thumbnails
even though the website maker has provided further
'enhancements', imo, you are starting to lose site of the main
idea.

It is like calling someone's home or car, a "first" home or car
because there are just so much better ones that folk seem to
manage to get or want as they live on... even when it might be
some poor sod's 8th!

[yeah, ok, I am thinking of my car... :)]

I just got a great idea! How about if we call large thumbnails "previews"
to prevent any disharmonious associational confusion with the main image?
This would be a discrete term used to indicate the image you see is more
than a thumb but less than the full-fledged image/content it links to.

Don't know why I didn't think of this before...

I am sorry, but no. This will simply not do. It is not as if
there is some big and defined problem about what to call pics
that link. It is a matter of understanding what is happening in
what context and so describing it. "Preview" would not capture it
if the image was perfectly adequate for looking at and enjoying
or learning or whatever (even though it links to some larger file
suitable for another purpose).

I just wanted to make the point that quite big pictures cannot be
sensibly called thumbnails in all contexts where they link to
even bigger ones. It would be just as big a mistake to call them
previews. If they do link to a very high quality file for
printing, the printing software might have something that
displays a preview of how it will sit on the page and so on, here
the meaning is clearer.

There is no general problem of naming to be solved. So please
don't be impressed too easily with any straw cast your way that
appears to solve "it".
 
N

Neredbojias

To further the education of mankind, Neredbojias
Ah, that sounds good. I will try to remember the term without slipping
back into my old bad habits like I usually do.

Update:

Sorry, old boy, but your idea was rejected and blatantly so. _Not by me, I
liked it, myself, but s o m e people are just adamantly persnickety.
 
N

Neredbojias

To further the education of mankind, dorayme
I am sorry, but no. This will simply not do. It is not as if
there is some big and defined problem about what to call pics
that link. It is a matter of understanding what is happening in
what context and so describing it. "Preview" would not capture it
if the image was perfectly adequate for looking at and enjoying
or learning or whatever (even though it links to some larger file
suitable for another purpose).

I just wanted to make the point that quite big pictures cannot be
sensibly called thumbnails in all contexts where they link to
even bigger ones. It would be just as big a mistake to call them
previews. If they do link to a very high quality file for
printing, the printing software might have something that
displays a preview of how it will sit on the page and so on, here
the meaning is clearer.

There is no general problem of naming to be solved. So please
don't be impressed too easily with any straw cast your way that
appears to solve "it".

How 'bout if we term it "The image that cannot be named"?

Blessings and peace be upon you.
 
S

Steven Saunderson

Sorry, old boy, but your idea was rejected and blatantly so.

It's a cruel, cold world. Hopefully someone will suggest a better term
and then I can fix my pages.
 

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
473,744
Messages
2,569,484
Members
44,903
Latest member
orderPeak8CBDGummies

Latest Threads

Top