I reacted in two ways when I heard about his presentation and the crowd reaction:
- It’s very good and about time that this is being focused on.
This belief is based on an old era, the so-called browser wars days, when IE 4/5 and Netscape 4 were fighting for domination. And we all know how that went…
Nowadays, if you write proper scripts according to the standardized DOM, also known as DOM scripting, you will target virtually every web browser in the market. For a comparison, you will even get more widespread support than CSS 2 has!
The problem we had was to get the scripts to work in all web browsers
If Microsoft only had taken the proper time and decision to implement proper DOM scripting, which is supported in any major web browser, as well as from IE 5 and up on PCs, things would’ve been fine. So, let’s kill this misunderstanding once and for all that has flourished for a long time. Correct written scripts will work in any web browser.
It has a script that triggers when the page is loaded, only for those web browsers that support the
document.getElementById, and this is verified through object detection. It then adds
Trust me, it’s a whole new level that will give you a big smile when you realize what you can accomplish! 🙂
*cackles and rubs hands gleefully*
Goooood! Now fulfil your destiny and take CSS's place at my side.
Thanks for visiting! 🙂
With AJAX, the word is getting out (shows what some abbreviation for an old technology can do) and I'll do my best doing so as well. Wouldn't mind learning some more myself either 😉
Sorry, just couldn't resist. ^_^
Thank you, and welcome here!
The light is bright and shiny, isn't it? 🙂
Walk towards it, walk!
Ha ha! 🙂
Well said, although many absolutes in there and only a sith lord would speak in absolutes. 🙂
However, albeit separated, I don't consider your photo site a good example of how JS can enhance usability. I started clicking the images until I realised that you show them on hover.
You broke a convention of thumbnail galleries, and that confuses users. It also assumes I can use a mouse and my screen is big enough to show the image, which it isn't, as this screenshot proves.
I wrote an example of a DOM/CSS gallery some time ago, that does follow the separation principles and does not break conventions.
More about it here:
Thanks for your comment. Absolutes might be good sometimes. 🙂
Regarding the image gallery:
Yes, maybe a text indicating that images are being loaded should've helped before you clicked them. However, my intention was that the initial explanation in the page would help the user to understand that.
It assumes you can use a mouse, but it isn't a requirement since you can <code>Tab</code> to each image and press <code>Enter</code>.
Also, my main motivation was to break the convention of thumbnail galleries, and to simplify viewing every image without the need to click them or go to another page.
Assuming people read texts above thumbnail galleries explaining their functionality is like assuming that users have 2mb DSL connections to see your site exclusively (instead of downloading stuff). It just does not happen 🙂
As you have seen in the screenshot you did not simplyfy my viewing experience at all. Sometimes conventions are there because they proved to be working.
A workaround would be to make the images clickable, and offer a checkbox to turn on the mouseover.
Well, call me naive, but I thought it would happen. 🙂
And as for the screenshot, it's a web browser with many extra toolbars, an image in the top line hovered and the page scrolled down a bit.
Given, with a certain height of the web browser window it works fine. To me, it was worth the risk with advantages I think the user got.
But it's all in the eye of the beholder, I guess… 🙂
The user being you in this case. It is the same problem with multi level dropdown navigations. You don't know the space you have to play with on the visitors' viewports, and when you only do mouseover (without any delayed hiding)it can be really frustrating for the visitor to try to scroll to see the whole picture and hiding it by that.
This is where flash is cool, as you could shrink the image to fit the size and other shenanigans like that.
Yes, and all the visitors to the web site that I've gotten feedback from that have appreciated a different approach. 🙂
But of course it's always a discussion with the viewport and what risks you're willing to take.
There will always be a minimum size for a web site to be optimally experienced.
Robert, you're going to love my gallery 🙂
I'm sure it will be.
I really hope it will have some lovely scripts then? 🙂
I've read your article now, and I wouldn't call your point of view tiny! 🙂
That's great to hear! 😀
Enhancement is the keyword. And yes, drag 'n' drop rocks! 🙂
Good luck with the sales of your book!
Has there been a "You were the chosen one!" joke yet?
Thanks for your comment.
No, no such joke yet… 🙂
Disabling script in IE is definitely not an easy task, so you might be on to something. Naturally, it’s very hard to back this up with facts, everyone has their own way of gathering statistics.