Paul Crowley

Huh - livejournal still marks up my < and > even with "don't auto-format" ticked!

I'm still confused, sorry. I'm pretty sure you don't actually have any photos of me anyway, but I'm trying to understand this in principle because if you feel this way, I'm sure that other webmasters do too. The problem is that there are several differences between your first and second example, so I'm still not clear what you're actually objecting to...

Is the difference simply whether or not the image is embedded in the page? i.e. whether I (or whoever) uses <a href="imagename.jpg"> or <img src="imagename.jpg"> to link to the picture? Or is it more than that? meta said "what he names the files, is his business"... do you mean you don't want people linking to the individual pictures, only to the page that they are on? What if you haven't set up a page for each individual image - just an index page? Or do you always make a page for each image? And is it just a case of credit - if an image is embedded, viewers would have to go to the source to find out whose site it was actually on, whereas if a link is given, even a stupid person could see that it was on your site?

It's just that I don't see any difference between someone embedding pictures from my site in their journals (or wherever), with text saying "courtesy of baratron" (or equivalent for a site off LJ), and your first example above. So I'm trying to understand your distinction.