> Patrick Lauke wrote: > I would argue ... that a logo ... is more than just a visual representation of text, in the same way that a head and shoulders passport photo of a person is not just a visual representation of the person's name
Yes - I agree absolutely ... although my full length response to that would definitely "risk [sending this discussion] disappearing up it own behind"! :D > and nobody would hopefully argue that my photo should be marked up as my name and then image replaced with the photo. I think my point here is this: HTML is really a text-based medium. Images have very little "meaning", for example, to a screenreader. In practical terms, for HTML as it is today, what would your photo contribute to the content of a page? I recently marked up a page which consisted of information about employees. The design required inserting a photo of each employee next to their description: I used background images for those photos because they were not essential content. What was important was the bit which went: <h3>John Smith</h3> <p>John works as blah blah blah ... </p> (Those h3+p details were also inside a list item for each employee) The point is that sticking in photos as <img /> here contributed practically nothing to the page. You say that you do not think your photo should not be the text "Patrick Lauke" replaced by an image: that would imply (quite rightly) that your identity as encapsulated by the photo is not summed up merely by the characters of your name. In that case, what should the alt text for an <img /> which is your photo be? Would it have to be "1000 words" ... ? :D (that's what longdesc is there for, obviously) > It's part of the company's identity, and as such is content - to a certain extent anyway. My logic processor returns this as both true and false :D (that's where your "extent" comes in?) True - philosophically True - for sighted-users in a graphical environment. False - in HTML (taken from a pure code or screenreader perspective), it's just a bit of alt text. .... as I've admitted though, there _are_ /real reasons/ why you would want an image (such as a logo) hard-coded into the page which you and others have covered in this thread. >From my perspective, where possible, I like have code where all required meaning is imparted through text (_and_ have this marked up _as_ text). I think which approach you take depends ultimately upon your goals and emphasis for the site/page in question. C ******************************************************************************** DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is confidential and should not be used by anyone who is not the original intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage mechanism. Neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept liability for any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not expressly made on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or one of its agents. Please note that neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept any responsibility for viruses that may be contained in this e-mail or its attachments and it is your responsibility to scan the e-mail and attachments (if any). No contracts may be concluded on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or its agents by means of e-mail communication. Macmillan Publishers Limited Registered in England and Wales with registered number 785998 Registered Office Brunel Road, Houndmills, Basingstoke RG21 6XS ******************************************************************************** ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
