Pop up technique

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Kathleen Coyne, Sep 17, 2003.

  1. I've been searching and searching, and I just can't seem to find a pop
    up that can do this for me. ALMOST... but not quite.

    I need a pop up that will:

    -If javascript (or whichever is used) is disabled, it will just pop up
    a browser with the image in it.

    -it will close when clicked.

    -it will close when a new pop up is created.

    I have found a wonderful script with all the above... except...

    -it must resize the image and window depending upon the screen
    resolution.

    Any ideas?

    Thank you.
     
    Kathleen Coyne, Sep 17, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. "Kathleen Coyne" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I've been searching and searching, and I just can't seem to find a pop
    > up that can do this for me. ALMOST... but not quite.
    > I need a pop up that will:


    No you don't.

    > -If javascript (or whichever is used) is disabled, it will just pop up
    > a browser with the image in it.


    whichever?

    > -it will close when clicked.


    every window can be closed by clicking "close". It just doesn't get simpler than
    that.

    > -it will close when a new pop up is created.


    a *new* pop up? The first was one too many.

    > I have found a wonderful script with all the above... except...


    No you haven't.

    > -it must resize the image and window depending upon the screen
    > resolution.


    Why? Screen resolution is meaningless in this context.

    > Any ideas?


    Yes - Don't make pop-ups. Don't resize *my* browser. Don't rely on javascript.
    Don't invent new controls for common functions.

    > Thank you.


    You're welcome.

    --
    Andrew Davidson
     
    Andrew Davidson, Sep 17, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Kathleen Coyne

    never u mind Guest

    > > I have found a wonderful script with all the above...
    >
    > No you haven't.


    Who are you to tell her what she has and hasn't found.


    >
    > > -it must resize the image and window depending upon the screen
    > > resolution.

    >
    > Why? Screen resolution is meaningless in this context.


    Because she wants it to. That's why.



    > > Any ideas?

    >
    > Yes - Don't make pop-ups. Don't resize *my* browser. Don't rely on

    javascript.
    > Don't invent new controls for common functions.


    I can almost see tears rolling down your face like a little baby. Don't
    touch my candy, don't play with my toys, Don't resize "my" browser window.
    Grow up you big pansy.

    >
    > > Thank you.

    >
    > You're welcome.


    Be helpful, don't be an ass.


    >
    > --
    > Andrew Davidson
    >
    >
     
    never u mind, Sep 17, 2003
    #3
  4. Hywel Jenkins, Sep 17, 2003
    #4
  5. Kathleen Coyne

    DU Guest

    never u mind wrote:
    >>>I have found a wonderful script with all the above...

    >>
    >>No you haven't.

    >
    >
    > Who are you to tell her what she has and hasn't found.
    >


    Note that no url, no chunks of significant code was provided. Just a
    tone of requesting this, that and give me that too.

    >
    >
    >>>-it must resize the image and window depending upon the screen
    >>>resolution.

    >>
    >>Why? Screen resolution is meaningless in this context.

    >
    >
    > Because she wants it to. That's why.
    >
    >


    Scr. res. does not make sense really. MSIE 6 and Mozilla-browsers have
    user settings for automatic resizing to fit the window dimensions. In
    any case, if you click a thumbnail, that's normally because you want to
    see the image in its original dimensions.

    >
    >
    >>>Any ideas?

    >>
    >>Yes - Don't make pop-ups. Don't resize *my* browser. Don't rely on

    >
    > javascript.
    >
    >>Don't invent new controls for common functions.

    >
    >
    > I can almost see tears rolling down your face like a little baby. Don't
    > touch my candy, don't play with my toys, Don't resize "my" browser window.
    > Grow up you big pansy.
    >


    Major browser manufacturers have understood the perspective of users.
    It's now easy to turn off the javascript ability to resize a window in
    NS 6.2+, Mozilla-based browsers, Opera 7 and many other browsers or MSIE
    6 with add-ons. Web developers should concentrate on providing useful,
    meaninful content and to let the chrome, toolbars, browser window in the
    hands of browser software and users via user settings.

    >
    >>>Thank you.

    >>
    >>You're welcome.

    >
    >
    > Be helpful, don't be an ass.
    >
    >
    >
    >>--
    >>Andrew Davidson
    >>
    >>

    >


    Multi-posting is the very first thing I hate about posts (fragmenting
    discussions, making other people post questions and answers when they
    are unaware that the answer/solution was given in another thread,
    etc..). That's what the OP did. There is already so many posts on popups
    and already thousands of threads in alt.html and comp.lang.javascript
    about popups that multiposting questions on popup is asking for trouble.

    DU
    --
    Javascript and Browser bugs:
    http://www10.brinkster.com/doctorunclear/
    - Resources, help and tips for Netscape 7.x users and Composer
    - Interactive demos on Popup windows, music (audio/midi) in Netscape 7.x
    http://www10.brinkster.com/doctorunclear/Netscape7/Netscape7Section.html
     
    DU, Sep 17, 2003
    #5
  6. Kathleen Coyne

    never u mind Guest

    "Hywel Jenkins" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <rj5ab.492123$uu5.83868@sccrnsc04>,
    > says...
    > > Be helpful, don't be an ass.

    >
    > Show us how.
    >
    > --
    > Hywel I do not eat quiche
    > http://hyweljenkins.co.uk/
    > http://hyweljenkins.co.uk/mfaq.php


    How about being helpful and not a bunch of arrogant jerks. This could be
    such a great group, but instead there's a small handfull of people here that
    think they are the greatest thing since sliced bread, and the knowledge they
    have to give must be given with a heaping side of arrogance. EVERYONE HAS
    TO START SOMEWHERE. Why can't you give the same information in a kind
    manner? Why do you have to act like a whiny baby when someone wants to make
    a pop up. How about instead of "Don't resize *my* browser window" you say,
    "most people find it annoying when there windows get resized, so it's best
    not to do that". Ok, conveys the same message and nobody has to feel stupid
    for wanting to try a new techninque. I'm so sick of arrogant pricks that
    think they are better than everyone else. RF is known for being whiny when
    it comes giving critiques....have you seen his site? He should be taking
    some of his own medicine. And that goes for most of the "know it alls" in
    this group with rather "bla" sites. Feel free to put me on your blocked
    senders list, that's fine, but just remember this, We all have to start
    somewhere. People come here looking for advice, not to be put down. There
    is not need to make people feel stupid. And stop taking everything so damn
    personally. Late............
     
    never u mind, Sep 18, 2003
    #6
  7. "never u mind" <> wrote in message
    news:rj5ab.492123$uu5.83868@sccrnsc04...
    > > > I have found a wonderful script with all the above...

    > > No you haven't.

    > Who are you to tell her what she has and hasn't found.


    She said the script was wonderful, but her description shows that it isn't. (Who
    am I? Some one who can read the OP.)

    > > > -it must resize the image and window depending upon the screen
    > > > resolution.

    > > Why? Screen resolution is meaningless in this context.

    > Because she wants it to. That's why.


    She may want to, but I wish to point out that her desire almost certainly stems
    from a misunderstanding. Many people think there is a straight-line ratio
    between screen resolution and available browser size - there isn't.

    > > > Any ideas?

    > > Yes - Don't make pop-ups. Don't resize *my* browser. Don't rely on
    > > javascript.
    > > Don't invent new controls for common functions.

    > I can almost see tears rolling down your face like a little baby.


    Not on my face you don't. Most people create web-sites to be helpful or to
    delight their visitors, yet everything she was trying to do would annoy and
    alienate. I thought it worthwhile to advise her against those things. However, I
    don't care whether she listens or not. My advice is given, and then I move on.
    No tears, nada.

    > > > Thank you.

    > > You're welcome.

    > Be helpful, don't be an ass.


    As explained, that's exactly what I did, whereas you just whinged and said
    nothing useful (ah - now I see those tears - can I lend you a handkerchief
    dearie?).

    --
    Andrew Davidson
     
    Andrew Davidson, Sep 18, 2003
    #7
  8. The "No pop ups" and "Don't close the window" arguments are
    interesting.

    The only reason why I implement those onto my website is because
    people request them.

    Yup. It's requested. It doesn't annoy them, in fact they prefer it.
    Just about anyone I show my websites to prefer that it pops up. I
    have even forgotten to implement a pop up, and the user got frustrated
    because it didn't automatically pop up.

    I had another user tell me they just don't close windows after a pop
    up image. He likes that they pop up, but he always forgets to close
    the window, and after awhile, he ends up with tons of open windows.
    When I implemented a way to automatically close the window or show the
    image in the other open window, he was extremely happy with the
    result.

    And every additional person has been very happy with the result as
    well.

    It's one thing for web masters to always design their sites for people
    who want to browse the web in a certain way - but remember, the
    average user doesn't know how to modify the web to their preferences -
    and others are too lazy.

    I've had someone tell me they don't want to put in the effort to
    "alternate click/open in new window." I've had many tell me they get
    pissed if an off site link doesn't pop up automatically because they
    end up losing the original site iwhen they didn't notice it wasn't a
    pop up, or they forgot to manually put it in a new browser.

    The majority aren't web savvy. I don't design for the anal-rententive
    web nazis. I design for my target audience - and for a portfolio
    oriented site, the target audience has low web skills.
     
    Kathleen Coyne, Sep 22, 2003
    #8
  9. "Kathleen Coyne" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > The "No pop ups" and "Don't close the window" arguments are
    > interesting.
    >
    > The only reason why I implement those onto my website is because
    > people request them.
    >

    <snip crap>
    > The majority aren't web savvy. I don't design for the anal-rententive
    > web nazis. I design for my target audience - and for a portfolio
    > oriented site, the target audience has low web skills.


    Opening new windows is a snake's nest of usability and accessibility
    problems.
    Why do you think AOL and Earthlink offer popup blockers? Why do Mozilla,
    Opera, and Google Toolbar have settings to interrupt new windows opening?
    Because they're a f&*%king nightmare to deal with and they *are not*
    user-friendly.

    In the overwhelming majority of the time, pop-up windows are unneccessary,
    annoying, and inaccessible.
    If you're opening pop-ups for supplemental content, you need to reassess the
    information architecture of the site.


    Dive Into Accessibility - Day 16: Not opening new windows

    http://diveintoaccessibility.org/day_16_not_opening_new_windows.html



    Don't Use Frames or Navigational Popups

    http://www.seankenney.com/publications/2001-04/



    Top Ten New Mistakes of Web Design: (#2 Opening new windows)

    http://www.useit.com/alertbox/990530.html

    Closing popup windows - or, the user rebellion
    http://www.structureinteractive.com/thought/white_popup.htm


    --
    Karl Core

    Charles Sweeney says my sig is fine as it is.
     
    EightNineThree, Sep 22, 2003
    #9
  10. Kathleen Coyne

    John C Guest

    On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 EightNineThree posted:

    > "Kathleen Coyne" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > The "No pop ups" and "Don't close the window" arguments are
    > > interesting.

    >
    > Opening new windows is a snake's nest of usability and accessibility
    > problems.
    > Why do you think AOL and Earthlink offer popup blockers? Why do Mozilla,
    > Opera, and Google Toolbar have settings to interrupt new windows opening?
    > Because they're a f&*%king nightmare to deal with and they *are not*
    > user-friendly.


    Oh, good grief. I've had nightmares, and new windows are not a nightmare.
    I'd say they're more on the order of this freakin' mosquito that's
    buzzing by my head every so often and who's gonna die pretty soon. Also,
    new windows should be distinguished from popups, and further distinction
    made for those that open without user input (the ads we all hate and
    block) as opposed to those that open when a user clicks the link (the new
    windows and/or popups that *some* people hate, *some* don't care, and
    *some* find helpful when done in appropriate circumstances).

    > In the overwhelming majority of the time, pop-up windows are unneccessary,
    > annoying, and inaccessible.


    I agree with that assessment (tho not sure about intended meaning of
    'inaccessible'). But as with many things, the "thing" is not the evil,
    but rather the manner in which it's used. Kind of like the saying "guns
    don't kill people, people kill people". In the overall scheme of things,
    however, popups are rarely lethal. But I've wondered if those flashing
    ads could trigger an epileptic episode.

    > If you're opening pop-ups for supplemental content, you need to reassess the
    > information architecture of the site.


    See Nielsen comment quoted below.

    > Top Ten New Mistakes of Web Design: (#2 Opening new windows)
    >
    > http://www.useit.com/alertbox/990530.html


    At http://www.useit.com/alertbox/990530_comments.html Mr. Nielsen says:

    <quote>To me, a pop-up is a window that is intended as a supplement to a
    primary browser window. Thus, it is typically smaller and it does not
    contain a "full" page of info. In contrast, the "new browser windows" I
    warned against as mistake #2 are intended to stand on their own and
    contain a full page. I actually agree that pop-ups can be useful; I
    simply observe that users often close the pop-ups without even looking at
    their content. Thus, I currently warn against using them for anything
    essential. Help may in fact be a great example of an appropriate pop-up:
    the text should definitely be short and it is best to be able to see the
    help without changing or obscuring the original context.</quote>

    --
    John C
     
    John C, Sep 22, 2003
    #10
  11. Kathleen Coyne wrote:

    > The majority aren't web savvy. I don't design for the anal-rententive
    > web nazis. I design for my target audience - and for a portfolio
    > oriented site, the target audience has low web skills.


    IME the non-web-savvy will be confused if you open a new window simply
    because they won't be able to use the "back" button to get back to your
    site.

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me - http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/?id=132
     
    Toby A Inkster, Sep 22, 2003
    #11
  12. Kathleen Coyne

    Kris Guest

    In article <>,
    (Kathleen Coyne) wrote:

    > It's one thing for web masters to always design their sites for people
    > who want to browse the web in a certain way - but remember, the
    > average user doesn't know how to modify the web to their preferences -
    > and others are too lazy.
    >
    > I've had someone tell me they don't want to put in the effort to
    > "alternate click/open in new window." I've had many tell me they get
    > pissed if an off site link doesn't pop up automatically because they
    > end up losing the original site iwhen they didn't notice it wasn't a
    > pop up, or they forgot to manually put it in a new browser.
    >
    > The majority aren't web savvy. I don't design for the anal-rententive
    > web nazis. I design for my target audience - and for a portfolio
    > oriented site, the target audience has low web skills.


    This is all assuming that people *want* new windows. For those that
    don't want it and those who do alike, you remove the choice.

    Besides, my mom always told me "if you want something, you have to do
    something for it".

    --
    Kris
    erlands (nl)
     
    Kris, Sep 22, 2003
    #12
  13. Kathleen Coyne

    John C Guest

    On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 07:13:35 +0100 Toby A Inkster posted:

    > Kathleen Coyne wrote:
    >
    > > The majority aren't web savvy. I don't design for the anal-rententive
    > > web nazis. I design for my target audience - and for a portfolio
    > > oriented site, the target audience has low web skills.

    >
    > IME the non-web-savvy will be confused if you open a new window simply
    > because they won't be able to use the "back" button to get back to your
    > site.


    I defer to people like Mr. Nielsen who've actually done studies. On the
    other hand, I've personally observed people who more easily grasped
    closing a second window than back-buttoning to their point of departure.
    Some people don't realize they can click the back button more than once!
    I've seen it several times. Admittedly, these were mostly government
    employees and debatable whether members of the genus homo sapiens. But,
    where on the evolutionary scale are you gonna draw the line for
    discussing usability?

    --
    John C
     
    John C, Sep 22, 2003
    #13
  14. "John C" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 EightNineThree posted:
    >
    > > "Kathleen Coyne" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > > > The "No pop ups" and "Don't close the window" arguments are
    > > > interesting.

    > >
    > > Opening new windows is a snake's nest of usability and accessibility
    > > problems.
    > > Why do you think AOL and Earthlink offer popup blockers? Why do Mozilla,
    > > Opera, and Google Toolbar have settings to interrupt new windows

    opening?
    > > Because they're a f&*%king nightmare to deal with and they *are not*
    > > user-friendly.

    >
    > Oh, good grief. I've had nightmares, and new windows are not a nightmare.
    > I'd say they're more on the order of this freakin' mosquito that's
    > buzzing by my head every so often and who's gonna die pretty soon. Also,
    > new windows should be distinguished from popups, and further distinction
    > made for those that open without user input (the ads we all hate and
    > block) as opposed to those that open when a user clicks the link (the new
    > windows and/or popups that *some* people hate, *some* don't care, and
    > *some* find helpful when done in appropriate circumstances).
    >


    Again, I ask: Why do you think AOL and Earthlink offer popup blockers? Why
    do Mozilla,
    Opera, and Google Toolbar have settings to interrupt new windows opening?

    Because enough people hate them that they've spawned the need for such
    things.

    > > In the overwhelming majority of the time, pop-up windows are

    unneccessary,
    > > annoying, and inaccessible.

    >
    > I agree with that assessment (tho not sure about intended meaning of
    > 'inaccessible').


    Pop-up ads are typically inaccessible for two reasons:
    1. They effectively break the back button
    2. They are often coded incorrectly, using either "#" or "javascript:;" as
    the hypertext reference. How does someone access that content if their
    browser does not recognize javascript? First, "#" is not a NULL hypertext
    reference, it is a fragment identified separator. Second, "javascript:;" is
    obviously not a scheme that is very useful if the user's browser does not
    recognize scripting.
    3. While it is possible to create an accessible popup, most people don't do
    it the right way.



    >
    > > If you're opening pop-ups for supplemental content, you need to reassess

    the
    > > information architecture of the site.

    >
    > See Nielsen comment quoted below.
    >
    > > Top Ten New Mistakes of Web Design: (#2 Opening new windows)
    > >
    > > http://www.useit.com/alertbox/990530.html

    >
    > At http://www.useit.com/alertbox/990530_comments.html Mr. Nielsen says:
    >
    > <quote>To me, a pop-up is a window that is intended as a supplement to a
    > primary browser window. Thus, it is typically smaller and it does not
    > contain a "full" page of info. In contrast, the "new browser windows" I
    > warned against as mistake #2 are intended to stand on their own and
    > contain a full page. I actually agree that pop-ups can be useful; I
    > simply observe that users often close the pop-ups without even looking at
    > their content. Thus, I currently warn against using them for anything
    > essential. Help may in fact be a great example of an appropriate pop-up:
    > the text should definitely be short and it is best to be able to see the
    > help without changing or obscuring the original context.</quote>


    How does this negate my statement that, " If you're opening pop-ups for
    supplemental content, you need to reassess the information architecture of
    the site."?

    I recognize the Logic mantra "Universal Statements are particularly false",
    but I would venture to say that most people don't know the difference
    between "appropriate pop-up" and an inappropriate one.

    I've seen one appropriate pop-up: a glossary of terms on a Mortgage site.


    --
    Karl Core

    Charles Sweeney says my sig is fine as it is.
     
    EightNineThree, Sep 22, 2003
    #14
  15. Kathleen Coyne

    Sean Jorden Guest

    "EightNineThree" <> wrote in
    news:bkmk0j$677$:

    > Again, I ask: Why do you think AOL and Earthlink offer popup blockers?
    > Why do Mozilla,
    > Opera, and Google Toolbar have settings to interrupt new windows
    > opening?


    I thought it was for people like my Grandpa who once came out in a cold
    sweat asking why his screen is suddenly filling up with windows. LIKE he
    was looking at CNN ;)

    Remember, Google still allows user initiated popups and both Mozilla and
    Google have white lists (never used the others, can't comment).
     
    Sean Jorden, Sep 22, 2003
    #15
  16. Kathleen Coyne

    John C Guest

    On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 EightNineThree posted:

    > "John C" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 EightNineThree posted:
    > >
    > > > "Kathleen Coyne" <> wrote in message
    > > > news:...
    > > > > The "No pop ups" and "Don't close the window" arguments are
    > > > > interesting.
    > > >
    > > > Opening new windows is a snake's nest of usability and accessibility
    > > > problems.
    > > > Why do you think AOL and Earthlink offer popup blockers? Why do Mozilla,
    > > > Opera, and Google Toolbar have settings to interrupt new windows

    > opening?
    > > > Because they're a f&*%king nightmare to deal with and they *are not*
    > > > user-friendly.

    > >
    > > Oh, good grief. I've had nightmares, and new windows are not a nightmare.
    > > I'd say they're more on the order of this freakin' mosquito that's
    > > buzzing by my head every so often and who's gonna die pretty soon.

    >
    > Again, I ask: Why do you think AOL and Earthlink offer popup blockers?


    Well, c'mon. Their decisions are purely marketing. Why does Proctor &
    Gamble offer "new & improved!" dish soap every year or so?

    > Why
    > do Mozilla,
    > Opera, and Google Toolbar have settings to interrupt new windows opening?


    I think Mozilla did because they saw a need or it was requested often,
    Opera and Google for the same reasons that motivate AOL and Earthlink.
    It's a hot bandwagon. Mind, I'm not saying that doesn't make it a good
    thing. Market forces often yield genuine benefits to humanity. But if you
    ask why a company does something, let's not confuse whose "need" for
    "what" (money) is controlling.

    > Because enough people hate them that they've spawned the need for such
    > things.


    Okay, that's different from saying they're inherently evil and all people
    hate them.

    > > > In the overwhelming majority of the time, pop-up windows are
    > > > unneccessary, annoying, and inaccessible.

    > >
    > > I agree with that assessment (tho not sure about intended meaning of
    > > 'inaccessible').

    >
    > Pop-up ads are typically inaccessible for two reasons:
    > 1. They effectively break the back button
    > 2. They are often coded incorrectly, using either "#" or "javascript:;" as
    > the hypertext reference. How does someone access that content if their
    > browser does not recognize javascript? First, "#" is not a NULL hypertext
    > reference, it is a fragment identified separator. Second, "javascript:;" is
    > obviously not a scheme that is very useful if the user's browser does not
    > recognize scripting.


    No argument there. I do get the sense that the people who feel strongly
    about popups and new windows are the same people who surf with javascript
    disabled. Maybe authors who insist on using popups and spawning new
    windows should be encouraged to use javascript exclusively.. ;-)

    Web authors range from the clueless to the clued-in. Some toward the
    clueless end still have useful content to contribute even though it's
    "inaccessible" or obnoxious for lack of knowing better. How to educate
    them? At what point in this thread should the OP have acquired an
    understanding of the www principles relevant to her inquiry as opposed to
    thinking she just ran into some reactionary personal opinions? You did
    the best job of educating by including some resources and references, but
    personal bias was still so unadulterated as to impair credibility.

    --
    John C
     
    John C, Sep 22, 2003
    #16
  17. Kathleen Coyne

    John C Guest

    On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 11:40:02 -0500 John C said to EightNineThree:

    > You did
    > the best job of educating by including some resources and references, but
    > personal bias was still so unadulterated as to impair credibility.


    Karl - I owe you an apology for that last bit about unadulterated bias. I
    just reviewed the entire thread as well as your first post, and your
    remarks, while colorfully reflecting a bias, were well balanced and
    referenced to enhance credibility. I still stand by the bit about your
    doing the best job of educating in the thread.

    John C.
     
    John C, Sep 22, 2003
    #17
  18. Dispite all these arguments, it still doesn't address the issue at
    hand. As if it's being avoided.

    Every average user I speak of about web issues *prefer* pop ups in the
    type of implemation that I use them for (larger images, and outside
    links), to the point of requesting their implementation.

    The reason why there are "pop up blockers" is because users don't want
    ads, or extra drivel when they are surfing. That is also why the
    Google blocker is considered a "smart blocker" because it allows user
    initiated pop ups.

    Thats what I have in my site - user initiated pop ups. The back
    button isn't "broken" because the pop ups are smaller than the screen
    size. Even if the user is browsing non-full screen, any pop ups will
    be offset from the original location. Thusly, it's known it's a pop
    up, and only causing minimal cases of "broken back button" confusion.

    My original request for a pop up simply was for a gallery of images.
    Anyone who regularly peruses through galleries expects the larger
    images to be popped up. It's not like I came up with this idea out of
    the blue. I used many different presidences that were recomended,
    weeding out ones with greater evils (frames), and choosing the most
    popular, and slowly modifying things along with user requests.

    The "over whelming majority of the time is unnessisary" was
    mentioned... but many are behaving as if it should never be done. A
    pop up is not a f** nightmare, as being compared to. User initiated
    pop ups are far from that to even those who are hyper sensitive to pop
    ups on the web.
     
    Kathleen Coyne, Sep 24, 2003
    #18
  19. Kathleen Coyne

    rf Guest

    "Kathleen Coyne" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > User initiated
    > pop ups


    Here is the key phrase. *User* initiated pop-ups.

    Just about every browser out there has a facility to open a link in a new
    window. In many of them this is as simple as holding down a key while
    clicking the link.

    The *user* has a choice. Open the link in the current window or open it in a
    new window.

    However if you, the author, arrange it so that the link always opens a new
    window then you have removed the choice from the user. You have limited
    their options to *only* openeing the link in a new window.

    If a user *likes* popups then, fine, allow them to open new windows.
    Similarly if a user does *not* like popups then, once again, allow them to
    do what they want.

    If *you* feel that your galery of images is best used in a popup environment
    then tell your viewers how to do this *if they want to*.

    Cheers
    Richard.
     
    rf, Sep 24, 2003
    #19
  20. "Kathleen Coyne" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    > Dispite all these arguments, it still doesn't address the issue at
    > hand. As if it's being avoided.
    >
    > Every average user I speak of about web issues *prefer* pop ups in the
    > type of implemation that I use them for (larger images, and outside
    > links), to the point of requesting their implementation.


    Please post an URL to an example.


    The issue you're attempting to address is made even worse with pop-ups, IMO.
    Your user doesn't go to a photo gallery to see one image. So, if you do it
    wrong, you could end up creating a whole swarm of open windows on the user's
    screen.
    You'd be even smarter to keep everything on one page and use something like
    PHP to display the larger image on request on the same page.
    This will allow the user to navigate the gallery without switching back &
    forth to different windows.

    //something like this

    if (!isset($detail)) {
    print ("<a href=\"gallery.php?detail=123\"><img src=\"thumbnail.jpg\"
    alt=\"Click for the large version\"></a>");
    // print all the other thumbs, too.
    }

    else if (isset($detail) {
    switch($detail){
    case '123':
    print ("<img src=\"large_version.jpg\" alt=\"This is the
    large version\">");
    break;
    // continue with switch
    }
    // then, print remaining thumbnails to choose from
    }


    No need for popups, does the same thing.


    --
    Karl Core

    Charles Sweeney says my sig is fine as it is.
     
    EightNineThree, Sep 24, 2003
    #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. Replies:
    2
    Views:
    8,531
    Randy Webb
    Feb 4, 2006
  2. Bone Ur
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    394
    Bone Ur
    Dec 19, 2007
  3. Chris Davoli

    Tool Tip pop up - pop up time is too short

    Chris Davoli, Feb 24, 2009, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    479
    Lee Atkinson
    Feb 24, 2009
  4. samppi
    Replies:
    27
    Views:
    492
    David A. Black
    Dec 5, 2007
  5. Madame Blablavatsky
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    172
    Dr John Stockton
    Sep 16, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page