John Faulds wrote:
> As I said, I couldn't say for certain what the relationship might be,
but my guess with the example given, as it's a photo gallery site, would
be that the photographer/artist feels like the photos should be in a
certain sequence, perhaps to facilitate the telling of a story through
images. That's only a theory without any back-up info from the original
poster, but I think illustrates that there could be occasions when
adding an order to images might be important.
--Tyssen Design
www.tyssendesign.com.au
Ph: (07) 3300 3303
Mb: 0405 678 590
Absolutely John!
A significant number of photographers regard a 'collection of
photographs' as being 'the work', and the way that work is shown (the
relationship between one image and it's adjacent images, and indeed, to
the whole) is of paramount importance. What I'm saying is best
illustrated by considering the case where the photographer is having a
show at a gallery : he doesn't just throw the images at the wall (so to
speak) - he spends ages deciding which image goes where, etc etc. My
point is that, in this case, Patrick's excellent rule of thumb that "
moving cells around changes the meaning of the data" applies to this
case also, and the work can be considered as tabular data. As I said,
it <em>is</em> subtle.
Interestingly (well, I think it is) there must be other subtle examples
where the relationship between items can be considered 'tabular', even
when there are no <em>obvious</em> connections.
--
Bob
www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
