Re: attatched photos

Ellis Cory wrote:
> Andy wrote.......Ellis how about giving it a break........
>
> If someone has taken the trouble to raise a point or question
> about my suggestion, then I think it is only right for me to
> respond to them and answer their points. Especially as no valid
> reason has been given for the idea not to work eg the way this
> particular program has been written cannot use attachments and
> the program is of a computer type that cannot be updated, then
> I would understand, but as it seems it is only preference,
> despite the fact that millions of others on hundreds of sites
> send thousands of attachments each day (including those on
> dial-up) it seems to me to be an excuse. After all, my
> suggestion was not an 'either/or' but a 'both/and', you do
> whatever is best for you.
 
Hi Ellis,

I have reliable broadband access, so download time isn't an issue
with me right now. However, I see merit in keeping an e-mail
list text only, and without html. When introduced, these
technologies immediately exclude or burden some readers.

Another issue is archiving. Text-based communication is compact
and easy to deal with. Once you start going multimedia, it
becomes more costly, in terms of effort and space, to maintain an
archive.

I think publishing images on the web, linked with url's in the
e-mails here, is a good compromise. Another benefit to doing it
this way, you can publish the images at a size which shows them
to the best effect (at least in terms of web-based imagery),
where attachments, and even posts to web-based forums, really
should be limited in size as you suggest.

Those who want to see the images can, and those who choose not to
aren't saddled with them.

cheers,
Scott

-- 
Scott Sellers                |
scottsellers@mindspring.com  |
_______________________________________________
Post to the list as PLAIN TEXT only - no HTML
pinhole-discussion mailing list
pinhole-discussion@spitbite.org
FAQ at http://spitbite.org/pinhole-discussion/list.html