Register | Login | |||||
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
| |
0 users currently in Help, Suggestions, Bug Reports. |
User | Post |
Gavin Posts: 137/181 |
Originally posted by Dagsha I guess. I don't really pay enough attention to verify that, but I can personally say that not having alpha-transparency support can be annoying. I'm sure there is some portion of the board that use non-transparent or non-alpha-transparent PNG's only because of a lack of cross-browser support. Certainly an ancillary concern, however I still think it's useful. |
D 2007 Posts: 74/497 |
Originally posted by GavinWell, someone else would have to modify it... and it wouldn't matter much, here, especially given it almost never uses alpha-transparent PNGs -- only fully transparent, which works fine, even in IE browsers...Originally posted by DagshaOriginally posted by GavinThe only problem with this, is that almost no images have a predefined height-width, and I doubt most users would add them anyway... |
Gavin Posts: 136/181 |
Originally posted by DagshaOriginally posted by GavinThe only problem with this, is that almost no images have a predefined height-width, and I doubt most users would add them anyway... Well, I'm not sure exactly why this script needs to have image width and height explicity stated in the image tag, but I know for certain you can get img element width and height properties without doing it (at least in mozilla-based browsers, I have not tested anything else). If I was to guess, I would say it's probably not even necessary and the script can be modified accordingly. So it's most likely no big deal. |
D 2007 Posts: 65/497 |
Originally posted by GavinThe only problem with this, is that almost no images have a predefined height-width, and I doubt most users would add them anyway... |
Gavin Posts: 135/181 |
Originally posted by Dei Hmm... actually kind of a badass script. Neat-o. But yes, AFAIK this would be easily integratable into the current board. You need to simply include the script, and it does the rest of the work for you. The Document Object Model includes the images object, accessed via document.images, which (conveniently enough) is an array of all the images on the page which this script parses and acts on. So full automation gets points One last thing to keep in mind was that it mentioned on the "How to Use" page is that you have to explicity include the image height and width in the img tag for it to work properly. Cool find. |
MathOnNapkins Posts: 277/1106 |
I tested it out in IE 6 and yeah it seems to work. Don't know if it could be "easily" integrated with the board. Keyword is easily. Though I'm kind of uneasy that it only checks for files of extension .PNG, since the file extension can be faked or someone might screw up and put the wrong extension. Isn't there any way to read the internal file type from Javascript? That is admittedly a minor point though. Awesome find. |
Doppelganger Posts: 156/300 |
I took some time to look up the entire transparent-pngs-wont-work-in-IE thing, and I found something that may be of use to the board's IE users. I'm not an expert in the board coding, but wouldn't the javascript coding in this page work in a board header or something? |