 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Darren New" <dne### [at] san rrcom> wrote in message
news:47863c26@news.povray.org...
> Invisible wrote:
>> I guess the only disadvantage is that you can't easily use tabbed
>> browsing with it. But that doesn't appear to be a big issue.
>
> I always thought the point was to keep people from saving the image
> without a lot of work.
Huh? No, only in a few cases I think. With the approach I have, it couldn't
be simpler to save the image. Right clicking on the link to the image works
and right clicking on the image itself does too.
Rune
--
http://runevision.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 15:21:18 +0000, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> Who is the most important person at your site - YOU.
>
>Um... no, technically it's the people who sit in the lab and actually
>generate income. Everybody else is auxhilery to them, technically.
There's your problem (or at least one of them :) you believe that. You are the
most important person to you and you are working to earn your own living and not
just to keep the company going.
>> Who will get no respect if they look as if they are working on an Oxfam hand me
>> down - YOU.
>
>Heh. I'm the youngest person here. And I'm a computer nerd. I get no
>respect anyway. ;-)
That is because you've got a crap monitor
>> Who is responsible for supplying equipment fit for purpose - THEM.
>
>They don't seem to take that too seriously. [Although in the last few
>days, it seems somebody has twisted the arm of the director of finance
>to get more new PCs into the UK. Pitty they are all coming from Dell...]
Don't bitch about that, rejoice you're getting more hardware.
>> If I were Cute Girl, I wouldn't be seen dead talking to someone who has a
>> monitor as bad as you describe.
>
>LOL! If you were Cute QA Girl, then... damn... we'd be making out right
>now! :-D Cos she's quite hot...
But am I?
>> I hope that you don't think that I'm getting at you but this is your first job
>> and you seem not to know what is expected of you. Personally I think that your
>> company are taking a loan of you. You are worth more than you are getting.
>
>Benny said something similar. Apparently his son earns more than me by
>stacking shelves at Tesco. Oh well...
You're letting the side down then. And I bet Benny's son has more chance of a
night out than you do.
If you are not going to get money get a better working environment, you are
important, you know.
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rune escribió:
> I'm testing a new way to show images in full size for my gallery on my
> website. It uses JavaScript, but to my understanding, JavaScript is so
> widely used now that virtually noone have it turned off (or else there would
> be tons of sites they couldn't use).
I have it turned off. NoScript plugin disables Javascript for all pages
except those explicitly on the whitelist. "Virtually nobody has
Javascript turned off, so let's not bother about it" is like saying
"everyone has a lot of CPU and RAM nowadays so why bother optimizing".
> Anyway, it has an acceptable fallback behaviour.
More than acceptable, compared to other sites...
Comments about the zoom itself:
The background would look better as a real transparency; the black/white
1px checker looks ugly. You could leave it as fallback if the browser
doesn't support real transparency, though.
The X button is too small.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 14:45:19 +0100, "Rune" <aut### [at] runevisioncom> wrote:
>Which do you prefer?
I like it but in IE 7 when you change the Page Zoom during the popup some thing
breaks and you get a page similar to the original site, with comments. It
doesn't happen every time and it happened mostly when going from Zoom 150% to
75%
IE 7 then started to hog resources and I had to shut it down (twice). In fact
I'm going to reboot. :)
It's good to see you back.
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rune wrote:
> I'm testing a new way to show images in full size for my gallery on my
> website. It uses JavaScript, but to my understanding, JavaScript is so
> widely used now that virtually noone have it turned off (or else there would
> be tons of sites they couldn't use). Anyway, it has an acceptable fallback
> behaviour.
I also have it off using NoScript. I only enable it if I *know* there
is something worth seeing (i.e. quite often).
--
DOS means never having to live hand-to-mouse
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rune wrote:
> Huh? No, only in a few cases I think. With the approach I have, it couldn't
> be simpler to save the image. Right clicking on the link to the image works
> and right clicking on the image itself does too.
Cool. Might be different code with the same effect. Now that I think of
it, I think the other one I saw was Flash.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
It's not feature creep if you put it
at the end and adjust the release date.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Nicolas Alvarez" wrote:
> Comments about the zoom itself:
>
> The background would look better as a real transparency; the black/white
> 1px checker looks ugly. You could leave it as fallback if the browser
> doesn't support real transparency, though.
The odd thing is that this seems to be supported by the code (it even comes
with a black, 50% transparent image), but for some reason is not used, even
in Firefox. I'll have to investigate further to find out why.
> The X button is too small.
The clickable area is larger than the visible X itself. I don't think I can
make the visible X bigger without making the frame thicker too, and I don't
want that.
Thanks for the comments!
Rune
--
http://runevision.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Stephen" <mcavoysATaolDOTcom@> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 14:45:19 +0100, "Rune" <aut### [at] runevisioncom>
> wrote:
>
>>Which do you prefer?
>
> I like it but in IE 7 when you change the Page Zoom during the popup some
> thing
> breaks and you get a page similar to the original site, with comments.
That sounds odd.
> It doesn't happen every time and it happened mostly when going from
> Zoom 150% to 75% IE 7 then started to hog resources and I had to
> shut it down (twice). In fact I'm going to reboot. :)
Hm. :( Unfortunately I can't test in IE7 right now, since I have IE6. As
long as more people have IE6 than IE7, I'm going to keep it, and it isn't
possible to have both on the same machine without putting a lot of effort
into it.
> It's good to see you back.
I don't think I've been gone? :)
Rune
--
http://runevision.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 21:03:10 +0100, "Rune" <aut### [at] runevisioncom> wrote:
>"Stephen" <mcavoysATaolDOTcom@> wrote:
>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 14:45:19 +0100, "Rune" <aut### [at] runevisioncom>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Which do you prefer?
>>
>> I like it but in IE 7 when you change the Page Zoom during the popup some
>> thing
>> breaks and you get a page similar to the original site, with comments.
>
>That sounds odd.
>
It does doesn't it.
>> It doesn't happen every time and it happened mostly when going from
>> Zoom 150% to 75% IE 7 then started to hog resources and I had to
>> shut it down (twice). In fact I'm going to reboot. :)
>
>Hm. :( Unfortunately I can't test in IE7 right now, since I have IE6. As
>long as more people have IE6 than IE7, I'm going to keep it, and it isn't
>possible to have both on the same machine without putting a lot of effort
>into it.
I'll try it with Firefox but it might be at my end. I've been having problems
since I've been using a WiFi connection.
>> It's good to see you back.
>
>I don't think I've been gone? :)
>
Quote:
"Gee, has it really been 6 years since my last image my 3d gallery?"
:)
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Stephen" <mcavoysATaolDOTcom@> wrote:
> I'll try it with Firefox but it might be at my end. I've been having
> problems
> since I've been using a WiFi connection.
Ok, thanks. I'll try it in IE7 next time I'm at uni.
>>> It's good to see you back.
>>
>>I don't think I've been gone? :)
>
> Quote:
> "Gee, has it really been 6 years since my last image my 3d gallery?"
> :)
Ah, but that's mostly because I had been doing animations instead. :)
Rune
--
http://runevision.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
