51–60 of 116 posts
Awesome! I love it. My favorite xkcd-inspired hack is still goatkcd[1] though. [1] NSFW http://goatkcd.com : goatse parody
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A warning is fine, but I just hate it when a site doesn't even let me try in another browser. I use Firefox Nightly, maybe it fixed the issues that are breaking your app? If you're detecting via user agent, what if I use an odd user agent? What if I want to look at the web console to see just what breaks in case I know what the issue is?
> I use Firefox Nightly, maybe it fixed the issues that are breaking your app? If it's using -webkit prefixed CSS, that's pretty unlikely. > What if I want to look at the web console to see just what breaks in case I know what the issue is? Anyone interested in doing that should be well aware of how to spoof a user agent.
Awesome! I love it. My favorite xkcd-inspired hack is still goatkcd[1] though. [1] NSFW http://goatkcd.com : goatse parody
I love how downvoting backfires here and ends up visually emphasizing the link. Until the CSS is fixed you could do something like: http://eat-it-downvoters-you-cant-silence.me
My suggestion on posts with as much downvotes as this one would be to remove the -tags which, in addition to introducing the grey colour would also prevent unintended clicks and bring attention to the destination of the link as it requires copy-paste.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A warning is fine, but I just hate it when a site doesn't even let me try in another browser. I use Firefox Nightly, maybe it fixed the issues that are breaking your app? If you're detecting via user agent, what if I use an odd user agent? What if I want to look at the web console to see just what breaks in case I know what the issue is?
> I use Firefox Nightly, maybe it fixed the issues that are breaking your app? If it's using -webkit prefixed CSS, that's pretty unlikely. > What if I want to look at the web console to see just what breaks in case I know what the issue is? Anyone interested in doing that should be well aware of how to spoof a user agent.
You are not answering the question. Why block a user-agent, if the check can be easily worked around?
Edit: I mean why block as opposed to display a simple warning ("this site is known to not work well with your browser").
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I use Firefox Nightly, maybe it fixed the issues that are breaking your app? If it's using -webkit prefixed CSS, that's pretty unlikely. > What if I want to look at the web console to see just what breaks in case I know what the issue is? Anyone interested in doing that should be well aware of how to spoof a user agent.
They should at least include the non-prefix css (or other prefixes) as well for when a feature becomes available on other browsers in case they forget to update it or if they're not aware of what other browsers support.
If you're building a fun hobby project, you can do whatever you like, including building it in a specific environment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I use Firefox Nightly, maybe it fixed the issues that are breaking your app? If it's using -webkit prefixed CSS, that's pretty unlikely. > What if I want to look at the web console to see just what breaks in case I know what the issue is? Anyone interested in doing that should be well aware of how to spoof a user agent.
"Anyone interested in doing that should be well aware of how to spoof a user agent." You are not answering the question. Why block a user-agent, if the check can be easily worked around? Edit: I mean why block as opposed to display a simple warning ("this site is known to not work well with your browser").
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I use Firefox Nightly, maybe it fixed the issues that are breaking your app? If it's using -webkit prefixed CSS, that's pretty unlikely. > What if I want to look at the web console to see just what breaks in case I know what the issue is? Anyone interested in doing that should be well aware of how to spoof a user agent.
> If it's using -webkit prefixed CSS, that's pretty unlikely. Unsupported CSS features should not affect the functionality of a web app, only its appearance. Emphasis on "should"; far too many web apps end up fundamentally broken when this happens.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, this a prototype and definitely not for everyone. It has many downsides. I agree Photoshop gives you full pixel control. I think it has some upsides too. You may treat comix source as html code and apply tools we have for coding today, eg. diffs, version control, collaboration via github. People may also collaborate on library of items, actors and their poses, so you don't have to re-create them or copy&pase all…
I agree it has some great upsides. I love the idea of localization, and version control is nice to easily revert changes, etc. Having a scalable comic that can change text on the fly is something that I've been hoping for for a long time. But I think you're strongest element is the WYSIWYG editor, as most people aren't going to be coding from only the HTML view (unless they know what pose="-11,9|-5,117|-11,99" will l…
Heads should be customizable in the future: https://github.com/darwin/cmx.js/blob/master/app/lib/cmx/ent...
Actually the system already supports attach points, so you can attach items to hands, foots and necks (right now the bubble is attached by default to a head bone).
The last generic piece which is missing will be element. Right now it just allows you to specify lines. In the future it will enable you to insert any SVG which is convertible down to paths. I will just resample them and convert them into XKCD-style lines while keeping other styling. This will enable you to insert arbitrary SVG drawings in the scene. I won't create web-based photoshop for SVGs, I will let you import SVG created in other tools as long it is convertible to paths. Imagine it as embedding bitmap images into HTML files. This will be similar idea.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They should at least include the non-prefix css (or other prefixes) as well for when a feature becomes available on other browsers in case they forget to update it or if they're not aware of what other browsers support.
If you're building NBCnews.com, sure. If you're building a fun hobby project, you can do whatever you like, including building it in a specific environment.
However, it does limit feedback for any of us not using Chrome. Author is probably cool with that though as it appears and I commend them for not making us jump through hoops to try it anyways by switching user agent.
Here's my problem. It works, fairly well. But I spent about 15 minutes doing one panel, trying to figure out the minor nuances. I kept thinking to myself "I could do a whole comic in about 5 minutes in photoshop" as I adjusted the person's location, arm, speech, etc (and that was just modifying the characters that were already in the scene). In the end it was just not worth it in my mind. Also, imagine creating somet…
Yes, this a prototype and definitely not for everyone. It has many downsides. I agree Photoshop gives you full pixel control. I think it has some upsides too. You may treat comix source as html code and apply tools we have for coding today, eg. diffs, version control, collaboration via github. People may also collaborate on library of items, actors and their poses, so you don't have to re-create them or copy&pase all…
The WYSIWIG will come in it's million forms later and you shouldn't focus on it.
I just need comix.vim and I'm good.
I'm imagining real time comics. Chat comics. Comic discussion forums. It's endless! ;)