[Gimp-web] News on Screenshots/Imagebox

[Roman Joost]

On Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 05:59:32PM +0200, Roman Joost wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 04:59:55PM +0200, Jakub Steiner wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 16:21 +0200, Jakub Steiner wrote:
> > > I'd revert the safari2 fix and let safari2 users have a
> > > plain html version for the splashes
> Yeh - I first thought, that we would go this way and I drop the
> lightbox approach ...
> 
> > Well even that turned out problematic, as $.browser.version.number()
> > gives useless results for safari browsers, sadly. So let's sum up the
> > options we have now:
> > 
> > * Use the last revision, but only show the nice overlays for
> >   non-safari browsers (even though v3 handles it).
> > * Depend on both jquery and prototype and use Roman's lightbox
> >   fixes.
> The last option would support a broader range of browsers, but has the
> disadvantage of being dependant on more than two javascript libraries
> for eyecandy.
> 
> I tend to vote for option one actually in hope that this option would be
> easier to maintain and would save us some time which we can use to
> improve more important parts of the site.
I thought about this a bit more and came to the conclusion, that using
both worlds (jquery + lightbox) might be better to support a broader
range. Depending on more than one libraries won't be a big problem for
computers today. The scripts create a semi-transparent background layer,
which sucks more on the computers perfomance than depending on more than
one lib.

The libraries we depend on will only be included in the pages with
screenshots or images in general. The other pages won't load them
anyways.

Greetings,
-- 
Roman Joost
www: http://www.romanofski.de
email: romanofski at gimp.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : /lists/gimp-web/attachments/20070815/09f79b2c/attachment.bin