- From: Jeff Seager <Jeff.Seager@wvdrs.org>
- Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 15:56:16 -0500
Geez, Ian! You digested all of that rather well, and I think what you offer is very sensible. Thanks for your hard work! In response to a couple of your questions to all: >> > http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,,1806799,00.html >> >> ...suggests we may want to have multiple <legend> elements per <figure>, >> to allow for a caption and photo credit to be given. What do people think? >> Would some other way of inline giving photo credit metadata be better? For practical and semantic reasons, photo credit metadata ought to follow the image itself as closely as possible. Copyright laws require artists to "affix" the notice (including the creator's name) to the protected work; not that copyright protection is our concern, but it's an example of practical and essential usage. I think the artist's name and copyright notice are worthy "advisory information" to be included in the TITLE attribute of <img>, <embed>, or <object>, and this has been possible for some time. Attribution -- with or without a copyright advisory -- could be styled optionally as part of the <legend>, but I don't think it warrants another instance of <legend> for the same image or object. Jeff Seager West Virginia Division of Rehabilitation Services
Received on Tuesday, 28 November 2006 12:56:16 UTC