61–70 of 114 posts
Interesting to see this is possible, but this is beyond what I would want to use css for, how far will "look ma! no javascript!" go? Seing the logic in a jquery click handler seems at least as readable / maintainable as a bunch of css rules for the same reason I prefer to have more logic in java in android applications than in various xml layout and manifest files.
can someone post a screenshot of this in IE6
The unseen: Clicking an image kind of works, thanks to the anchors. The browser will scroll down to that image, just like the TOC links on Wikipedia articles.
So I will get lightboxed even with my no-javascript browsing habits? I liked that most sites simply serve the direct image url to me. Lightbox is an annoying eye-candy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't mind it if it's snappy and the image loads almost instantaneously, which is what I got when viewing this demo. Typically, with javascript, I'd have to wait a few seconds for the loading-wheel to spin until the image finally loads. Not that I can't wait a few seconds; it's just annoying.
Worse is when there's a series of images being displayed in a lightbox and because the whole thing "needs" to be centered and the navigation is not absolutely positioned, the next and previous buttons move around on the screen.
Interesting to see this is possible, but this is beyond what I would want to use css for, how far will "look ma! no javascript!" go? Seing the logic in a jquery click handler seems at least as readable / maintainable as a bunch of css rules for the same reason I prefer to have more logic in java in android applications than in various xml layout and manifest files.
Depending on the implementation, a CSS only lightbox can be 508 accessible, and a javascript lightbox could be inaccessible.
So I will get lightboxed even with my no-javascript browsing habits? I liked that most sites simply serve the direct image url to me. Lightbox is an annoying eye-candy.
You're really not the least annoyed by having to ping-pong back and forth when watching an image gallery, with whatever eventual content reloading that may be implied?
So I will get lightboxed even with my no-javascript browsing habits? I liked that most sites simply serve the direct image url to me. Lightbox is an annoying eye-candy.
I don't mind it if it's snappy and the image loads almost instantaneously, which is what I got when viewing this demo. Typically, with javascript, I'd have to wait a few seconds for the loading-wheel to spin until the image finally loads. Not that I can't wait a few seconds; it's just annoying.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Au contraire, the back button behaves exactly as it should. It's not how users would expect it to function, but it does obey the stack.
Actually, it does exactly what I ( an Android user ) expect the back button to do and what I've wanted every lightbox to do. Sometimes the css for the close button is wrong, or the js is messed up and the close button doesn't work. The back button closing the lightbox is exactly what I want.
Out of curiosity, what is the point of a "light box"? I tend to open lots of images into new tabs while I'm reading articles, and it's really annoying to have the rest of the article go black when I do.
I suspect it's a classical case of "you're not your user".
I personally think it's really annoying for the technically literate, and really confusing for the rest of the population.
What I really love, is the chrome plugin that zooms facebook photos on hovering them; facebook photo zoom[1]
[1]: https://chrome.google.com/extensions/detail/elioihkkcdgakfba...
