DISQUS

michaelsurtees I suppose everyone is different when it comes to offering advice, but would it hurt to just say “Hey Michael, I realize your busy doing epic design work, but when you have a moment maybe it would be a good idea to include the alt text with the images. I realize that you must have run out of time this morning.” Politeness goes a long way—plus the web isn't print, It can actually be iterated on.

Matt McInerney to be fair, we haven't used one CENTER tag on the site. How are you proposing we code our site?

michaelsurtees I dunno about that, most people are smart enough to read that the logo actually does spell out ICFF as International Contemporary Furniture Fair. And that's how they brand it on their website. But for those that still don't know, I've added the name in the subtitle of the page.

sigh

michaelsurtees I have to respectfully disagree with you Joe. My wife who's a much better designer than me is much more focused. I don't need a book to explain that.

Matt McInerney Hey Joe, where is the podcast was that two letter theory stated? I can't find it.

Thanks for the suggestions, we'll look into fixations, saccades, and Kevin Larson.

Aaron Heth Hey Joe,

Apologies for that. I'm not sure where at in the show it is, but if it was said, we did not mean literally exactly two letters. I believe I also meant words.

The point was a reference to the actual study, which said something loosely along those lines. I'm pretty sure the context also would show it was a loose connection.

However, we'll be more careful to make that known in the future. Thanks for listening and your comments!

michaelsurtees i won't argue that i do need to learn more html and css. i spent most of xmas doing just that – if i was making something from the ground up, the css would be very different from what i've inherited from this blog template. i'm just starting now to fix what was originally there.

but thanks for those hover and focus states tips, will look into it...

michaelsurtees more like out of practice or something like that Joe...

the sidebar should be ignored, there's a lot of hurt going on there that needs to be fixed.

michaelsurtees fair comment, will have to make sure that's part of the next serious rev. that i do w/ this blog

mathewi Thanks for the putdown as usual, Joe. At least it's a bit better than pissing all over everyone all the time, which seems to be your oeuvre.

Nick Not at all. And it's perverse of me to foment this, even if I'm now practically hard-wired for it thanks to Gawker work.

But what bugs me is that you are a legend in your own way, Merlin is a legend in his, and as a little kid I always assumed that legends all got along.

And at the same time I very much like the way you and Merlin just traded barbs: by picking at each other's ideas, and by at least phrasing personal attacks so wittily that the truth doesn't particularly matter. It's the level of discourse that Gawker commenters only occasionally reach, and then only within the confines of Gawker with the threat of expulsion and superior writers hanging over them.

Nick I was referring to the rebloggers; my actual commenters have been entirely gracious.

Keith Oh, ok. Cool.

Keith True story, I subscribed to it for a year in junior high. But, you're right, I didn't get any of the jokes.

Jonathan Bailey There's no need to remind me of fair use. I based the idea of using thumbnails only in the API on ARR images in the Google images ruling, which put that type of use deep into the safe category. However, it is very likely that someone who chooses ARR will not want their content in the API. If I am wrong and most of the people who do choose ARR do want their content in the API, then that should be changed. It was just an example and a best guess at intentions. I admit that.

However, it is interesting that you mention tag harvesting and RSS feeds as those are things that do not necessarily require the republication of the image.

Regarding embedding, I am using the term in the exact same context as Flickr does. That is precisely to avoid confusion. Technically correct or not, it is the common term for the process of grabbing HTML code to place an element hosted on another domain and/or site and display it on yours. If you look at Flickr, you'll find they use the term "embed it" to describe the process of copying the HTML code and that is a commonly understood term.

Finally, I fail to see your last point but perhaps I didn't make it clear what I was proposing here. I didn't mean that they should use the actual CC code, but use that style where you ask reality-based questions that are easy to understand and have direct answers. If the process was written and designed well, it would default to ARR the same as now and make it clear the consequences of selecting another license.

You are right that ARR is the default license, as it should be, but the other default settings enable and encourage uses that are often incompatible with the wishes. The goal of Flickr right now should be to mesh the licensing terms with how the image is actually used.

On that note, if the most conservative license setting, ARR, is the default, then shouldn't the most conservative API setting, meaning disabled, be the default as well? It would seem to be the most fair as turning that on also means giving up rights to your work via an implied license.

Just to be clear though, I certainly don't think copyright should be replaces by Creative Commons. First off, that would be impossible since CC was a system built upon copyright law, meaning that it relies upon the current legal setup to work, and second I feel artists should have the choice. However, I feel those choices should be made as simple and as clear as possible.

Going back to the original point. If I get confused trying to license my images via Flickr, what chance do most others have?

mathewi Thanks, Joe. When you leave an original comment, maybe I'll start
coming up with original posts.


On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Disqus