On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 01:11:02PM -0500, Carol Spears <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> do you mean something like this:
> but i think the on demand images on this page were not rendered with
there are no on-demand images on that page in the dynamic-html sense. I
create the buttons at "make dist" time, e.g. when my local html pages get
published to goof.com
> gimp. the page is very very informative, yet i was not able to access
> it with lynx.
hey, lynx should work great with my pages ;) at least, as much as lynx can
be called great.
> with a graphical browser, the images are very cool though.
all my friends say: well, the idea is nice, but the images are butt-ugly ;)
> between these images and the usual ones found on web pages. what would
> be the advantage of this sort of rendering?
in other projects of mine I *do* plan to dynamically create buttons (of
course heavily cached). If you look at why "traditional" web design is
so expensive the reason (partly!) seems to be the major time effort:
redrawing buttons (and other elements) again and again. actions don't help
that much (many artists don't know how to use it). Of course, writing perl
scripts won't help in that case, too ;)
----==-- _ |
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +--
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / [EMAIL PROTECTED] |e|
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+
The choice of a GNU generation |
Gimp-developer mailing list