Jakob Persson wrote: > [...] > >Thank you very much for taking your time setting this up. I attempted to use >GIFs but I never managed to get the GIFs to look good enough but these ones >you made look real nice and sharp, with high color fidelity. The problem I >can see is with the background elements sliding under it and the drop >shadows I have but it seems to work great with the GIFs you got there. > > Some finetuning in drawing the img's, I'll send you the used method off-list.
>>btw 2, At some moments, not always, your page is loading very slowly, >>especially in FF (?). To see what is downloaded all together, I tried >>the speed tester of WebSiteOptimization.com, but that is failing - don't >>know why. See speed rapport request >><http://www.websiteoptimization.com/services/analyze/wso.php?url=http://www >>.jakob-persson.com/>. >> >> >I'm using a Drupal module that prevents spam bots from accessing the site, >it seems to block this site as well. I'll have to disable the module and >test the site. >What might slow it down is the IE behavior which traverses the DOM tree to >load the alpha for the PNG files. > > Another reason to get rid of it! ;-) >>btw 2, Why shouldn't you combine all the nav-images and their >>hover-variants in 1 image, and use css-hover instead of the >>"MM_preloadImages()" script and a lot of html-mouse codes? It can >>simplify and speed up the pages, I guess. >> >> >That would be a good idea. I'd like to use the PNGs for now but reducing the >number of PNGs to just one and use the alphaimageloader filter in the CSS >instead, that would speed things up considerably. > >Reason I don't use CSS hovers is because images for navigation is an old >technique which produces similar behavior across browsers, whereas css >hovers aren't so predictable, I was thinking of using an <ul><li> list, the >ones I've seen so far haven't been consistent across browser. And for this >part of the site where a 1 pixel gap would be highly visible I opted to use >a more traditional technique. However it would sort the image preloading, >and would speed up page load time. > > I think you haven't to be too afraid for 1px differences in hovering css-images. They are almost 1/2px predictable! - If the images fit in the combined img, they can be pixel-precisely positioned. >Well I have to head off and do some experimentation! >Again, thank you very much! > >Jakob > > To compare, some experiments about transparency: Transparent png-like gifs <http://home.tiscali.nl/developerscorner/css-discuss/transparent_gif_test.htm>, Semi-transparent css-dropshadows <http://home.tiscali.nl/developerscorner/transparency/transparent-dropshadow.htm>. About css-hovers and background-positioning: Article in Dutch: 3 css-hoverable buttons, 6 images combined <http://home.tiscali.nl/developerscorner/port-hole/knoppenblok.htm>. Positioning of background-images in css: The port-hole theory <http://home.tiscali.nl/developerscorner/port-hole/porthole.htm>. Good luck! francky ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d IE7b2 testing hub -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7 List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
