W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webplatform@w3.org > October 2012

Re: Acceptable media.

From: Alex Komoroske <komoroske@google.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 16:29:18 -0700
Message-ID: <CAPwaZpULOwkCmusDds+5CQ7LHY-YPC3GLbpFa9utjaKXnMKBEA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com>
Cc: Jonathan Garbee <jonathan@garbee.me>, "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
The image is in use as a generic example of an image that text floats
around. There will likely be a lot of cases where a demo or example needs
to show something off about working with an image. In those cases I don't
think "relevancy" is necessary.

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 4:24 PM, Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com> wrote:

> Perhaps we owe it to our audience to keep images only if they are RELEVANT
> as well as inoffensive, not obscene, etc. What's relevant about a cat with
> a strip of bacon taped to it's ribs? Funny, maybe, but...
> +Scott
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 7:42 AM, Jonathan Garbee <jonathan@garbee.me>wrote:
>
>>  So, it sound so far like we should go with, "As long as it isn't
>> obscene we can have a laugh."  I'm down with that as long as others are.  I
>> just saw that and professionalism jumped into my head straight away
>> compared to having fun.
>>
>> So at this point the main question would be, Does anyone simply outright
>> object to non-professional style images?
>>
>> -Garbee
>>
>>
>> On 10/31/2012 6:37 PM, Alex Komoroske wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Jonathan Garbee <jonathan@garbee.me>wrote:
>>
>>> I somehow ended up checking recent uploads and found this little treat
>>> [1].  While funny, I am wondering if we should have some terms for
>>> acceptable media that is uploaded to the site?  I think we should ask
>>> images be more professional than this.
>>>
>>
>>  Whoa, at first glance I thought that was a cat with a recent surgical
>> wound (gross!). Other than that concern about this particular image,
>> however, pictures that are a bit irreverent don't personally bother me.
>>
>>  On the one hand, we want to create a credible site
>> that professionals can trust. On the other, WPD is part of the internet
>> ecosystem--an ecosystem that has a certain kind of irreverent humor. I'm
>> *personally *fine with images that are irreverent as long as they aren't
>> over the top or potentially offensive.
>>
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> -Garbee
>>>
>>> [1] http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/File:box_baco.jpg
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Wednesday, 31 October 2012 23:30:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 May 2013 19:57:34 UTC