In webkit, no, none of the various lazy loader's that use image replacement to 
cancel loading work, regardless of the JavaScript framework you're using.

I recommend starting with <a href="image_source.jpg"> and then converting them 
to image tags with a dummy image, and then later replacing the src with the 
original href.  If webkit support is important, that's the best progressively 
enhanced way of doing it.

On May 13, 2010, at 11:25 AM, brook wrote:

> does that mean that this lazy loader thing doesn´t actually work?
> 
> On May 13, 12:40 pm, Ryan Florence <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Keep in mind webkit loads it regardless.  Once it's in the DOM as <img 
>> src="whatever.jpg"> you can change it to <img src="blank.gif"> and it's 
>> going to load both.  No stopping it, no matter what.
>> 
>> https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6656
>> 
>> The only real way is to start w/ non-image elements like
>> <span data-src="whatever">, convert them to <img src="blank.gif"> and later 
>> swap the source to <img src="whatever">
>> 
>> On May 13, 2010, at 10:30 AM, brook wrote:
>> 
>>> thanks michal - i was posting mine at the same time.  cheers.b
>> 
>>> On May 13, 12:28 pm, brook <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> so i just found and took a look at david walsh´s lazy loader and he
>>>> has neat trick of replacing the image source with some dummy.gif and
>>>> then when needed replacing it the original source.
>> 
>>>> i guess that should have been easy to figure out.  oh well.b
>> 
>>>> On May 13, 12:18 pm, brook <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>>>> this probably seems like a silly question. but i promise it would be
>>>>> useful to me...
>> 
>>>>> is it possible to stop an image from loading?  in other words if in my
>>>>> dom i have
>> 
>>>>>                    <img id="dumb" src="imagename.jpg">
>> 
>>>>> i want to do something like
>> 
>>>>>                    document.id('dumb').stopLoading()
>> 
>>>>> and later on if it turns out i need to
>> 
>>>>>                    document.id('dumb').load()
>> 
>>>>> ideas?
>>>>> thanks,
>>>>> brook

Reply via email to