- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 15:25:51 +0200
- To: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- CC: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, SWEO@spunkymail-mx6.g.dreamhost.com, IG?@spunkymail-mx6.g.dreamhost.com, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, www-tag@w3.org
Henry S. Thompson wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Dan Brickley writes: > >> HST wrote: > >>> I did say 'to some extent'. A photograph of a painting of George V >>> surely depicts George V, and an MP3 of a wax cylinder of a player >>> piano roll of Rubenstein playing the Hammerklavier is still a >>> rendering of the Hammerklavier. >> Only if you assume total coverage of the content of the >> original. Eg. thumbnail images don't depict everything that the source >> image depicts (we went around that block in FOAF). > > Hmm? What _does_ a thumbnail of an JPEG (of a) photograph of the > Eiffel tower depict, if not the Eiffel tower? If you show it to 1000 > people, and as them what it is, I'll bet you all but the most > obstreperous geeks (and Fair Witnesses :-) will say "(a picture of) > the Eiffel Tower". Are they all wrong? Many automatic thumbnail algorithms (eg. flickr's) cut out a square from the original rectangle, and so may omit content from the original. So they don't necessarily depict everything that the original depicted. Dan
Received on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 13:26:26 UTC