Today, under the title of "r", a Redditor linked to a graphic showing the total volume of water on Earth, relative to volume of everything else on the planet.
This is a great infographic in its sheer illustrative simplicity. But, were they to receive the image file with no accompanying context, most viewers could only guess what they're looking at.
Metatags, linkbacks and similar web devices exist to describe and provide provenance for digital images. When images get republished, however, there's no guarantee that such appended information will follow. By downloading and pasting the image into this post, I've in effect broken the chain.
So, what to do to make sure the graphic's meaning, and therefore its value, will survive its voyage through the information universe? I haven't the expertise in computer and library science to suggest curatorial best practices. But from a composition/design standpoint, I'd advise the graphic's creator, or its original publisher, to compress a title and label into graphic. A simple failsafe if a blow to artistic minimalism.
This is a great infographic in its sheer illustrative simplicity. But, were they to receive the image file with no accompanying context, most viewers could only guess what they're looking at.
Metatags, linkbacks and similar web devices exist to describe and provide provenance for digital images. When images get republished, however, there's no guarantee that such appended information will follow. By downloading and pasting the image into this post, I've in effect broken the chain.
So, what to do to make sure the graphic's meaning, and therefore its value, will survive its voyage through the information universe? I haven't the expertise in computer and library science to suggest curatorial best practices. But from a composition/design standpoint, I'd advise the graphic's creator, or its original publisher, to compress a title and label into graphic. A simple failsafe if a blow to artistic minimalism.
No comments:
Post a Comment
How do you relate?