<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The photo must link back to its photo page</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/the-photo-must-link-back-to-its-photo-page/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/the-photo-must-link-back-to-its-photo-page/</link>
	<description>Tango, photography and whatever&#039;s bleeding edge</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2011 14:28:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sudar Muthu</title>
		<link>http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/the-photo-must-link-back-to-its-photo-page/comment-page-1/#comment-194764</link>
		<dc:creator>Sudar Muthu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Dec 2007 08:28:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/the-photo-must-link-back-to-its-photo-page/#comment-194764</guid>
		<description>Hi,

Can you please let me know how to get the above HTML code in Flickr? I have been trying for quite sometime but couldn&#039;t find the HTML code generation option.

Thanks!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi,</p>
<p>Can you please let me know how to get the above HTML code in Flickr? I have been trying for quite sometime but couldn&#8217;t find the HTML code generation option.</p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Night Dreaming (by Sudar) &#187; Embedding Flickr Photos in WordPress</title>
		<link>http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/the-photo-must-link-back-to-its-photo-page/comment-page-1/#comment-194763</link>
		<dc:creator>Night Dreaming (by Sudar) &#187; Embedding Flickr Photos in WordPress</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Dec 2007 08:25:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/the-photo-must-link-back-to-its-photo-page/#comment-194763</guid>
		<description>[...] Can anyone please let me know how to get the HTML code from Flickr to embed individual photos in other websites? I don&#8217;t want to hotlink directly to the picture but want to get the HTML code like youtube. I know picasa provides this option. I could even get hold of a screenshot of the HTML embed code in Flickr, but the author is discussing about a different issue. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Can anyone please let me know how to get the HTML code from Flickr to embed individual photos in other websites? I don&#8217;t want to hotlink directly to the picture but want to get the HTML code like youtube. I know picasa provides this option. I could even get hold of a screenshot of the HTML embed code in Flickr, but the author is discussing about a different issue. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Luc Van Braekel</title>
		<link>http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/the-photo-must-link-back-to-its-photo-page/comment-page-1/#comment-1867</link>
		<dc:creator>Luc Van Braekel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 May 2006 01:03:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/the-photo-must-link-back-to-its-photo-page/#comment-1867</guid>
		<description>No, it&#039;s not bizarre. It&#039;s a purely semantic issue.  You have to read it literally, and you have to make a distinction between *linking* and *posting*.

The first case says: you can LINK to this photo...  Linking is not the same as posting the picture.  Of course with the first alternative you are posting it, with the second alternative you can use the URL for linking directly to the image file.

If you link directly to the image file, you don&#039;t have to link to the photo page (which would be difficult, unless you have 2 links next to one another, of course).

I&#039;m interpreting this as follows: you can either PUBLISH the picture itself, but then you must link to the photo page, OR you can link directly to the picture file - a link, that is, without displaying the picture on your blog, just the link.

Read carefully what it says and make the distinction between &#039;you can link&#039; and &#039;if you post&#039;.  If you read exactly what it says, there is no contradiction at all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, it&#8217;s not bizarre. It&#8217;s a purely semantic issue.  You have to read it literally, and you have to make a distinction between *linking* and *posting*.</p>
<p>The first case says: you can LINK to this photo&#8230;  Linking is not the same as posting the picture.  Of course with the first alternative you are posting it, with the second alternative you can use the URL for linking directly to the image file.</p>
<p>If you link directly to the image file, you don&#8217;t have to link to the photo page (which would be difficult, unless you have 2 links next to one another, of course).</p>
<p>I&#8217;m interpreting this as follows: you can either PUBLISH the picture itself, but then you must link to the photo page, OR you can link directly to the picture file &#8211; a link, that is, without displaying the picture on your blog, just the link.</p>
<p>Read carefully what it says and make the distinction between &#8216;you can link&#8217; and &#8216;if you post&#8217;.  If you read exactly what it says, there is no contradiction at all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bart</title>
		<link>http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/the-photo-must-link-back-to-its-photo-page/comment-page-1/#comment-1864</link>
		<dc:creator>Bart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 May 2006 15:57:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.forret.com/2006/05/the-photo-must-link-back-to-its-photo-page/#comment-1864</guid>
		<description>Bizzzzar.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bizzzzar.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.913 seconds -->

