Re: [WSG] PNG Question
Only supported in IE 6 with a hack, kind of an ugly one too as it renders the PNG's transparent area with a mid gray until it has finished loading, I guess if it's on a small image it's ok. I've had a lot of luck with PNG Behavior: http://webfx.eae.net/dhtml/pngbehavior/pngbehavior.html It's an .htc, which you may have to configure your server to deliver properly. You assign the behavior to the img elements via your CSS rules. Handles src changes to/from other pngs or non-pngs. (This only works with actual img tags; if you want to affect pngs as your background-image, then you should apply the filter directly in your CSS, and my advice is to make the image the same size as the container it's backgrounding.) I've hacked this a bit, so that the img is visibility:hidden; until the htc loads/runs, avoiding the ghostly gray-background issues. The trick is that you must only do this if JS is running, otherwise you might wind up with a site with no images. (The hack is testing right now -- NRFPT.) -- Ben Curtis : webwright bivia : a personal web studio http://www.bivia.com v: (818) 507-6613 ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] PNG Question
Terrence Wood wrote: Patrick H. Lauke said: IE does not natively support 24 bit alpha transparency on PNGs without some seriously hacky workarounds. ...which is to say that IE *does* support 8-bit transparency (i.e. same as gif). That is about the only reason to ever use the GIF any more. Apart from that GIF is pretty much useless. Everthing it can do PNG does better. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] PNG Question
Alan Trick wrote: Terrence Wood wrote: ...which is to say that IE *does* support 8-bit transparency (i.e. same as gif). That is about the only reason to ever use the GIF any more. And, as I mentioned, the fact that very old browsers don't know what a PNG is...which is only an issue if you know for sure that a sizeable part of your audience still uses these user agents (e.g. some government or education sites). -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] PNG Question
Alan Trick said: ...which is to say that IE *does* support 8-bit transparency (i.e. same as gif). That is about the only reason to ever use the GIF any more. Apart from I meant it supports png with 8-bit transparency. kind regards Terrence Wood. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
[WSG] PNG Question
Greetings all, I wanted to see what people's comments were as to using .png's vs. .gifs these days. I have a design that will require those nice transparency effects only a .png can provide if I want it to be just like the mockup. Do most browsers support that yet, or do I have to go with the gif that has been carefully shaved? If you care, the mockup is http://sausalito.sitesbyjoe.com/ and the shadow in question is on the logo - the problem is created by the pattern in the background behind it - blah blah blah. Thanks, Joe Taylor http://sitesbyjoe.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] PNG Question
Only supported in IE 6 with a hack, kind of an ugly one too as it renders the PNG's transparent area with a mid gray until it has finished loading, I guess if it's on a small image it's ok. Joseph R. B. Taylor wrote: Greetings all, I wanted to see what people's comments were as to using .png's vs. .gifs these days. I have a design that will require those nice transparency effects only a .png can provide if I want it to be just like the mockup. Do most browsers support that yet, or do I have to go with the gif that has been carefully shaved? If you care, the mockup is http://sausalito.sitesbyjoe.com/ and the shadow in question is on the logo - the problem is created by the pattern in the background behind it - blah blah blah. Thanks, Joe Taylor http://sitesbyjoe.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] PNG Question
Joseph R. B. Taylor wrote: I have a design that will require those nice transparency effects only a .png can provide if I want it to be just like the mockup. Do most browsers support that yet, or do I have to go with the gif that has been carefully shaved? IE does not natively support 24 bit alpha transparency on PNGs without some seriously hacky workarounds. http://www.alistapart.com/stories/pngopacity/ Also, if you're still getting visits from users of older browsers such as Netscape 4.x (yes, I know, less and less of a consideration, but worth mentioning nonetheless) GIF is the safest choice (as they don't even understand 8 bit PNGs). P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] PNG Question
Additionally: you may be best off using a fallback mechanism, so that browsers which are not capable of displaying 24 bit PNGs can still get *something*. An idea (by no means the best around) is my little experiment in PNG image replacement http://www.splintered.co.uk/experiments/19/ -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] PNG Question
Hi I've had fairly good results using PNGs, however IE on Windows does not support transparency in PNGs and usually replaces it with a grey filler colour. A situation at work meant I simply had to use some PNGs with transparency, and make them work in IE, which lead me to PieNG (http://www.bazon.net/mishoo/articles.epl?art_id=430) The script gets around the problem with some IE filters and a transparent gif. It wasn't quite over though, I can't remember why now, but this script does not work on images which are not visible when the page loads e.g. those used for mouse over effects. I re-wrote some of it to remove that limitation and can dig it out if you like. One last issue I had with PNGs was trying to match them to background colours specified in CSS which proved to be seriously hit and miss but if you play with the settings enough it can be done. The difference was only slight but enough to upset a few people. Adam H p.s. my first post on here... Greetings all, I wanted to see what people's comments were as to using .png's vs. .gifs these days. I have a design that will require those nice transparency effects only a .png can provide if I want it to be just like the mockup. Do most browsers support that yet, or do I have to go with the gif that has been carefully shaved? If you care, the mockup is http://sausalito.sitesbyjoe.com/ and the shadow in question is on the logo - the problem is created by the pattern in the background behind it - blah blah blah. Thanks, Joe Taylor http://sitesbyjoe.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] PNG Question
Patrick H. Lauke said: IE does not natively support 24 bit alpha transparency on PNGs without some seriously hacky workarounds. ...which is to say that IE *does* support 8-bit transparency (i.e. same as gif). The other gotcha you need to watch out for is the gamma correction applied by different browsers which can cause problems with color matching. Futher discussion and comparision table at: http://hsivonen.iki.fi/png-gamma/ kind regards Terrence Wood. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
