How they did it?

  • Thread starter rafael.llaurado
  • Start date
B

Barbara de Zoete

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 |
`-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'
 
R

Roy Schestowitz

__/ [[email protected]] 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
 
J

Jonathan N. Little

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)
 
R

rafael.llaurado

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.
 
J

Jonathan N. Little

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.
 
C

code_wrong

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

--

transparent PNG I think
 
R

Roy Schestowitz

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

Jonathan N. Little

code_wrong wrote:
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
 
J

Jonathan N. Little

Barbara de Zoete wrote:

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

Sorry could not resist! ;-)
 
J

Jonathan N. Little

Jonathan said:
Barbara de Zoete wrote:


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
 
B

Barbara de Zoete

Barbara de Zoete wrote:


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 |
`-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'
 
R

Roy Schestowitz

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

Jafar As-Sadiq Calley

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.
 
T

TJ

In
Jafar As-Sadiq Calley said:
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.
 
R

Roy Schestowitz

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

Jafar As-Sadiq Calley

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.
 

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
473,744
Messages
2,569,483
Members
44,903
Latest member
orderPeak8CBDGummies

Latest Threads

Top