(Link to AcmlmWiki) Offline: thank ||bass
Register | Login
Views: 13,040,846
 Main | Memberlist | Active users | Calendar | Chat | Online users
Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album 		05-13-24 03:08 AM
0 users currently in Help, Suggestions, Bug Reports.
Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - Help, Suggestions, Bug Reports - Adding transparency support New poll | |
Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread
User Post
Doppelganger

8DS








Since: 11-17-05
From: 65 00 20 00 65 00 1F 00 65 00 2F 00

Last post: 6293 days
Last view: 6293 days
Posted on 02-28-06 10:14 PM Link | Quote
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?
MathOnNapkins

1100

In SPC700 HELL


 





Since: 11-18-05

Last post: 6293 days
Last view: 6293 days
Posted on 02-28-06 11:22 PM Link | Quote
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.
Gavin

Cheep-cheep
Vandalism is not tolerated


 





Since: 11-17-05
From: IL, USA

Last post: 6370 days
Last view: 6313 days
Posted on 03-06-06 06:28 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Dei
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?


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.
D 2007
D


 





Since: 02-19-06

Last post: 6340 days
Last view: 6340 days
Posted on 03-06-06 09:53 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Gavin
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.
The only problem with this, is that almost no images have a predefined height-width, and I doubt most users would add them anyway...
Gavin

Cheep-cheep
Vandalism is not tolerated


 





Since: 11-17-05
From: IL, USA

Last post: 6370 days
Last view: 6313 days
Posted on 03-06-06 10:59 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Dagsha
Originally posted by Gavin
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.
The 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
D


 





Since: 02-19-06

Last post: 6340 days
Last view: 6340 days
Posted on 03-06-06 11:05 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Gavin
Originally posted by Dagsha
Originally posted by Gavin
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.
The 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.
Well, 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...
Gavin

Cheep-cheep
Vandalism is not tolerated


 





Since: 11-17-05
From: IL, USA

Last post: 6370 days
Last view: 6313 days
Posted on 03-07-06 01:37 AM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Dagsha
Well, 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...


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.
Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread
Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - Help, Suggestions, Bug Reports - Adding transparency support |


ABII

Acmlmboard 1.92.999, 9/17/2006
©2000-2006 Acmlm, Emuz, Blades, Xkeeper

Page rendered in 0.039 seconds; used 381.68 kB (max 462.38 kB)