How they did it?

Discussion in 'HTML' started by rafael.llaurado@gmail.com, Sep 9, 2005.

  1. Guest

    , Sep 9, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. On 9 Sep 2005 05:59:30 -0700, <> wrote:

    > Can someone tell me how they did the effect we can see in the
    > leftbotton corner of the page
    > http://www.sitepoint.com/article/core-relationship-strategy? I fount it
    > really interesting.
    >


    What effect? I don't see anything happening. (Opera 7.54, WinXP, no scripts,
    flash, images)

    --
    ,-- --<--@ -- PretLetters: 'woest wyf', met vele interesses: ----------.
    | weblog | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html |
    | webontwerp | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html |
    |zweefvliegen | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html |
    `-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'
    Barbara de Zoete, Sep 9, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. __/ [] on Friday 09 September 2005 13:59 \__

    > Can someone tell me how they did the effect we can see in the
    > leftbotton corner of the page
    > http://www.sitepoint.com/article/core-relationship-strategy? I fount it
    > really interesting.


    Are you talking about "Hide Nav" on the side, which triggers a pop-up that
    penetrated all my lines of defence? These are rather common, but unless you
    can confirm you were referring to this particular feature, I cannot
    elaborate.

    Roy

    --
    Roy S. Schestowitz | The most satisfying eXPerience is UNIX
    http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 74572E8E
    2:25pm up 15 days 16:17, 3 users, load average: 0.35, 0.44, 0.46
    Roy Schestowitz, Sep 9, 2005
    #3
  4. saz Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > Can someone tell me how they did the effect we can see in the
    > leftbotton corner of the page
    > http://www.sitepoint.com/article/core-relationship-strategy? I fount it
    > really interesting.
    >
    >

    If it's the "hide Nav", it's fairly easy to do, but I would highly
    advise against that.

    What if the viewer accidentally hid the nav bar and couldn't figure how
    to reopen it?

    Don't laugh, you always have to assume your average viewer is computer
    illiterate.
    saz, Sep 9, 2005
    #4
  5. wrote:

    > Can someone tell me how they did the effect we can see in the
    > leftbotton corner of the page
    > http://www.sitepoint.com/article/core-relationship-strategy? I fount it
    > really interesting.
    >

    Didn't look at the code but can guess with javascript attached to page's
    onload event that
    1. Get browser window height
    2. Locate bottom panel DIV
    3. set DIV's top == window height
    4. make DIV visible
    5. then in a timed interval move DIV's top by some increment until top
    value >= (window height - DIV height)

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
    Jonathan N. Little, Sep 9, 2005
    #5
  6. Guest

    I am reffering to the books we can see as located in a botton frame but
    with it top over the content in the superior frame.
    , Sep 9, 2005
    #6
  7. wrote:

    > I am reffering to the books we can see as located in a botton frame but
    > with it top over the content in the superior frame.
    >

    Thought that is what you meant, described process in previous message.
    The irregular top is just a transparent GIF.

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
    Jonathan N. Little, Sep 9, 2005
    #7
  8. code_wrong Guest

    "Jonathan N. Little" <> wrote in message
    news:eUgUe.679$...
    > wrote:
    >
    >> I am reffering to the books we can see as located in a botton frame but
    >> with it top over the content in the superior frame.
    >>

    > Thought that is what you meant, described process in previous message. The
    > irregular top is just a transparent GIF.
    >
    > --


    transparent PNG I think
    code_wrong, Sep 9, 2005
    #8
  9. Guest

    I got the idea. Thanks to all of you.
    , Sep 9, 2005
    #9
  10. Re: Transparent Footer

    __/ [code_wrong] on Friday 09 September 2005 15:29 \__

    >
    > "Jonathan N. Little" <> wrote in message
    > news:eUgUe.679$...
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>> I am reffering to the books we can see as located in a botton frame but
    >>> with it top over the content in the superior frame.
    >>>

    >> Thought that is what you meant, described process in previous message.
    >> The irregular top is just a transparent GIF.
    >>
    >> --

    >
    > transparent PNG I think


    Oh, look at that...! The books did now show up the last time I visited. I
    assume that the same applies to others who replied to this post and were
    baffled. I did get a pop-up the previous time though... *frown*

    As for transparency down at the bottom div, I did something similar last
    week <
    http://www.schestowitz.com/Research/Progress/Reports/2005-2006/RSPRS077/ >.
    The layer is partionally transparent so the background become visible.

    Roy

    --
    Roy S. Schestowitz | "Hack to learn, don't learn to hack"
    http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 74572E8E
    3:45pm up 15 days 17:37, 3 users, load average: 0.36, 0.48, 0.57
    Roy Schestowitz, Sep 9, 2005
    #10
  11. code_wrong wrote:
    <snip>
    >>Thought that is what you meant, described process in previous message. The
    >>irregular top is just a transparent GIF.
    >>
    >>--

    >
    >
    > transparent PNG I think
    >
    >

    Correct 'images/books/freelance1/catfish1.png', but as I said I hadn't
    bothered to search the code...same diff except care must be taken to
    allow MS limited support with PNG

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
    Jonathan N. Little, Sep 9, 2005
    #11
  12. Barbara de Zoete wrote:

    <snip>
    > What effect? I don't see anything happening. (Opera 7.54, WinXP, no
    > scripts, flash, images)
    >

    Or joy!

    Sorry could not resist! ;-)

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
    Jonathan N. Little, Sep 9, 2005
    #12
  13. Jonathan N. Little wrote:

    > Barbara de Zoete wrote:
    >
    > <snip>
    >
    >> What effect? I don't see anything happening. (Opera 7.54, WinXP, no
    >> scripts, flash, images)
    >>

    > Or joy!
    >
    > Sorry could not resist! ;-)
    >


    Dang! Now I got Ian Dury running through my head "...makes Jack a dull
    b-o-y BOY..."

    :-D

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
    Jonathan N. Little, Sep 9, 2005
    #13
  14. On Fri, 09 Sep 2005 17:06:37 GMT, Jonathan N. Little <>
    wrote:

    > Barbara de Zoete wrote:
    >
    > <snip>
    >> What effect? I don't see anything happening. (Opera 7.54, WinXP,
    >> no scripts, flash, images)
    >>

    > Or joy!
    >


    <g> Lots of it. Not distracted by all sorts of eyecandy, I can focus on
    _content_ en enjoy that to the full.
    Depends on what your need is from the internet, I guess.

    It is also a very effective filter. Not having all that junk in my screen
    filters out the crappy pages. If a page doesn't work, I give it a second chance
    by letting Opera display the page as plain as possible, not even allowing table.
    Usually that solves problems. But if a page doesn't display usable in that bare
    mode, I simply move on to the next result on the Google SERP's.

    Besides that, it just shows what _can_ go wrong with pages that rely on scripts
    or flash or images, without the author and designer providing any appropriate
    alternative for them. I like to get reminded every once in a while :)

    --
    ,-- --<--@ -- PretLetters: 'woest wyf', met vele interesses: ----------.
    | weblog | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html |
    | webontwerp | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html |
    |zweefvliegen | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html |
    `-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'
    Barbara de Zoete, Sep 9, 2005
    #14
  15. Jafar As-Sadiq Calley, Sep 9, 2005
    #15
  16. Re: Transparent Footer

    __/ [Jafar As-Sadiq Calley] on Friday 09 September 2005 23:09 \__

    > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >> As for transparency down at the bottom div, I did something similar last
    >> week <
    >> http://www.schestowitz.com/Research/Progress/Reports/2005-2006/RSPRS077/
    >> >. The layer is partionally transparent so the background become visible.

    >
    > You just made my day. It doesn't work with IE! Woohoo! :)


    Knowingly so. Please see the following entry from last week:

    http://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2005/08/31/condolences-to-explorer/

    I could no longer stay behind because of one buggy browser. It validates
    fine if I add the alt attribute to <img />. 32-bit transparencies ought to
    work as well. Use a broken browser or O/S at your own risk was the
    attitude. I have been nice to IE for years, but enough is enough.

    Roy

    --
    Roy S. Schestowitz | "Software sucks. Open Source sucks less."
    http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 74572E8E
    6:20am up 16 days 8:12, 7 users, load average: 1.95, 1.69, 1.63
    Roy Schestowitz, Sep 10, 2005
    #16
  17. Re: Transparent Footer

    On Sat, 10 Sep 2005 06:26:20 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    >> You just made my day. It doesn't work with IE! Woohoo! :)

    >
    > Knowingly so. Please see the following entry from last week:
    >
    > http://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2005/08/31/condolences-to-explorer/


    I posted a link into comp.os.linux.advocacy. I hope you don't mind. You
    have a fan already though. He said...
    "What a cool Web page. I've never seen one like that before. Just press
    page-down to get to the next point. And you don't need proprietory
    crapware (PowerPoint) to see the presentation."

    Well done on taking a stand against IE's anti-webstandards stance. My
    moonlife-records.com site also uses .png transparency which means the menu
    buttons have a white background which is a shame.

    --
    Jafar Calley
    Producer - http://moonlife-records.com
    --------------------------------------
    See the latest Mars and Saturn images
    http://fatcat.homelinux.org
    Jafar As-Sadiq Calley, Sep 10, 2005
    #17
  18. TJ Guest

    Re: Transparent Footer

    In news:p,
    Jafar As-Sadiq Calley <> wrote:

    > On Sat, 10 Sep 2005 06:26:20 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >>> You just made my day. It doesn't work with IE! Woohoo! :)

    >>
    >> Knowingly so. Please see the following entry from last week:
    >>
    >> http://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2005/08/31/condolences-to-explorer/

    >
    > I posted a link into comp.os.linux.advocacy. I hope you don't mind.
    > You have a fan already though. He said... "What a cool Web page. I've
    > never seen one like that before. Just
    > press page-down to get to the next point. And you don't need
    > proprietory crapware (PowerPoint) to see the presentation."
    >
    > Well done on taking a stand against IE's anti-webstandards stance. My
    > moonlife-records.com site also uses .png transparency which means the
    > menu buttons have a white background which is a shame.


    Well done to you too. That is, if the moonlife-records site mission is to
    chase IE users away.

    I wanted to check out what was happening with the .png transparency and
    began wondering why the page was taking so long to load. (>20 seconds via a
    4.4 megabits per second cable connection) So naturally I hit stop and
    peeked at the source. ACK!

    <bgsound src="http://moonlife-records.com/mp3/disloop.mp3"
    loop="100"></bgsound>

    And then I left. Not only was it taking forever to load, but _I'll_ decide
    what comes out of my speakers, not you, thanks.

    I thought attempting to force sound on a visitor was generally acknowledged
    as being a design no-no. No?

    Given the latest browser usage stats, I'm not even going to argue the merits
    (if any) of, "taking a stand against IE's anti-webstandards stance" other
    than to say it would seem akin to cutting off your nose to spite your face.
    Though in fairness I'll say this. I hit the page again with Firefox and it
    loaded in <4 seconds. Without the sound, of course.
    TJ, Sep 10, 2005
    #18
  19. Re: Transparent Footer

    __/ [Jafar As-Sadiq Calley] on Saturday 10 September 2005 14:53 \__

    > On Sat, 10 Sep 2005 06:26:20 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >>> You just made my day. It doesn't work with IE! Woohoo! :)

    >>
    >> Knowingly so. Please see the following entry from last week:
    >>
    >>

    http://schestowitz.com/Weblog/archives/2005/08/31/condolences-to-explorer/
    >
    > I posted a link into comp.os.linux.advocacy. I hope you don't mind. You
    > have a fan already though.



    Thank you for posting that link. Even though I am subscribed to
    comp.os.linux.advocacy I hadn't noticed your post until you mentioned it.


    > He said...
    > "What a cool Web page. I've never seen one like that before. Just press
    > page-down to get to the next point. And you don't need proprietory
    > crapware (PowerPoint) to see the presentation."



    To be fair, let us not forget to acknowledge the 'motor' which is S5 (GPL):

    http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/tools/s5/

    I mention it in _many_ different places throughout my site including the
    metadata. I also used to embed links in the presentations themselves, but
    the viewers/audience saw it as propaganda, which they did not appreciate.


    > Well done on taking a stand against IE's anti-webstandards stance. My
    > moonlife-records.com site also uses .png transparency which means the menu
    > buttons have a white background which is a shame.



    My site's share of Firefox roughly equates that of IE. Moreover, if we never
    'tell' IE users that their browser is buggy, will they ever upgrade? It
    bothers me that bodies like FEMA spit at my direction while inferior
    browsers never get punished because they are bundled to a commercial O/S,
    which naturally (unjustifiable) sums up to a majority.

    Roy

    --
    Roy S. Schestowitz | "Seeing bad movies only encourages them"
    http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 74572E8E
    5:10pm up 16 days 17:41, 4 users, load average: 0.45, 0.87, 0.90
    Roy Schestowitz, Sep 10, 2005
    #19
  20. Re: Transparent Footer

    On Sat, 10 Sep 2005 11:46:51 -0400, TJ wrote:

    > I hit the page again with Firefox and it
    > loaded in <4 seconds. Without the sound, of course.


    Consider it punishment for using ie? ;) Actually, I haven't learnt another
    way of doing it yet. I've begun learning a little php. I guess one day
    I'll have a little applet or something to browse and listen at will. Sorry
    for the inconvenience.

    --
    Jafar Calley
    Producer - http://moonlife-records.com
    --------------------------------------
    See the latest Mars and Saturn images
    http://fatcat.homelinux.org
    Jafar As-Sadiq Calley, Sep 10, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. ska4reak

    where did they come from?

    ska4reak, Nov 14, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    311
    Bill Priess
    Nov 14, 2003
  2. Poppy

    How did they do this ?

    Poppy, Jan 16, 2004, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    386
    Curt_C [MVP]
    Jan 16, 2004
  3. Coldman
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    375
  4. =?Utf-8?B?cm9kY2hhcg==?=

    how did they do that?

    =?Utf-8?B?cm9kY2hhcg==?=, Sep 2, 2005, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    340
    S. Justin Gengo
    Sep 3, 2005
  5. Daniel Waite
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    225
    Daniel Waite
    May 2, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page