showing larger images in pop up window.

D

dorayme

Greg N. said:
Well I had foolishly expected you to go a bit further down into that
site. OK, Have a look at http://hothaus.de/greg-tour-2005/ro2.htm

Yes, ok... maybe language probs and slow dial-up made me
impatient and distracted me, I can see now I could have chosen
other paths.

If I get broadband, will I get Germans to listen and enjoy the
sounds of old classical motorbikes?

Yours are very nice pictures and it is a nice site... and - I
guess you want something relevant - the links work in a standard
and sensible way and the OP would be well advised to note it.

Phew! I'm outa here...
 
G

gil

At approximately 2006/01/16 08:04, Travis Newbury typed these characters:
Yes, call a different HTML page that displays the image and has the
button.




Yea, you might not want to use a pop up window for this.

I guess that there is no elegant way to code a link on a thumbnail to
display a pop up window with larger image and caption when activated.
Although no one said it couldn't be done, the consensus is that I should
stick to the tried and true no risk method, and create a separate html
page for each larger image, with the caption text.

Seems like a lot of wasted space to have a full screen window display a
4cm x 6cm large image with caption. Of course I could make the image
even larger now, if I didn't have to concern myself with the dial-up
download times of these images. (The images have been optimized to be 5
to 15 kb each).

In my mostly rural area, only about 30% have high-speed connections, and
my site is mainly for them. Download times do MATTER.

Thanks for all of your help.
Gil
 
J

Jose

Seems like a lot of wasted space to have a full screen window display a 4cm x 6cm large image with caption.

How do you control the size of the image on somebody else's monitor?
And what if they want to display the image larger than 4cmx6cm (which to
me is a thumbnail, not a picture I want to examine closely in itself)?

Even the browser doesn't know how big the monitor is. Just let the
non-thumbnail fill the window it opens in.

Jose
 
J

Jonathan N. Little

gil wrote:

I guess that there is no elegant way to code a link on a thumbnail to
display a pop up window with larger image and caption when activated.
Although no one said it couldn't be done, the consensus is that I should
stick to the tried and true no risk method, and create a separate html
page for each larger image, with the caption text.

Why do you assume you need to open up lager picture into a new window?

Seems like a lot of wasted space to have a full screen window display a
4cm x 6cm large image with caption. Of course I could make the image
even larger now, if I didn't have to concern myself with the dial-up
download times of these images. (The images have been optimized to be 5
to 15 kb each).

First of all cm, in, feet, kilometers means nothing on a webpage!
Pixels/unit ratios for image does not determine display size, absolute
pixels count for width and height do *with respect to the users monitor
resolution *unless constrained with HTML WIDTH and HEIGHT
attributes*,(but do not do it for a host of reasons)

An image of 300x300 px on in browser window 400x400 px requires no more
bandwidth then full screen is 800x600 px or 1200x1600 px. It is the
image that will have the loin share of the bytes and that didn't change.

1) Use server side scripting PHP may be your easiest bet.
2) Make your thumbs and images
3) A simple flat file may do for your, simple tab separated text file

images.txt
#ImageID <tab> Thumb <tab> ThmCaption <tab> Image <tab> ImgCaption
1 small1.jpg My Thumbnail big1.jpg My Image of blah
2 small2.jpg My Thumbnail 2 big2.jpg Another Image...

4) Make a thumbnail index page in PHP that reads above text file and
creates a listing of thumbnail links that links to a single receiving
PHP page to show big image with caption, the PHP will plug in the values
from read file/

<div>
<a href="bigpage.php?id=<?php echo $id ?>">
<img src="<?php echo $thumb ?>" alt="thumb"><a/>
<?php echo $thumbCaption ?>
</div>

5) bigpage.php receives query string id=1 uses images.txt to look up
record id #1

6) builds page with read values for your bigger picture

<div>
<img src="<?php echo $image ?>" alt="the big picture">
<?php echo $imageCaption ?>
</div>
<p><a href="thumbs.php">Back To Thumbnails</a></p>

7)With a return link on page user can get back to your thumbnails, no
need for new window!

Very simple to manage for small scalle db...
In my mostly rural area, only about 30% have high-speed connections, and
my site is mainly for them. Download times do MATTER.

Thanks for all of your help.
 
G

Greg N.

gil said:
I guess that there is no elegant way to code a link on a thumbnail to
display a pop up window with larger image and caption when activated.

You seem to be mainly concerned with an "elegant way to code", but that
was not what most answers were referring to. People were trying to tell
you that pop ups are not a pleasant or "elegant" thing to deal with from
a user perspective.

And yes, there is no elegant (read: simple) way to code what you want,
other than creating an individual HTML file for each image or doing some
server side programming.
 
J

Jonathan N. Little

Greg said:
You seem to be mainly concerned with an "elegant way to code", but that
was not what most answers were referring to. People were trying to tell
you that pop ups are not a pleasant or "elegant" thing to deal with from
a user perspective.

And yes, there is no elegant (read: simple) way to code what you want,
other than creating an individual HTML file for each image or doing some
server side programming.
I think that was what I essentially told him, complete with a basic road
map on how to do it with 2 PHP pages and a data file.
 
?

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard_Talbot?=

gil wrote :
At approximately 2006/01/16 08:04, Travis Newbury typed these characters:


I guess that there is no elegant way to code a link on a thumbnail to
display a pop up window with larger image and caption when activated.

Gil, read again your original post. You'll see that 9 lines out of 13
were about a close button. You got an answer on that, regarding that, etc..
Later, you explained more what you were looking to do. You failed to
give more details on the overall picture of what you wanted to do. You
put too much emphasis on that close button.

For your information, more and more browser manufacturers are
restricting more and more powers of script to play, to "toy with" the
window object. If a script shouldn't open automatically a window, then
why should it be able to close a window or bring it back on top, just
like that?

Mozilla 1.x, Firefox 1.x and Nestscape 7.x all allow users to neutralize
windowRef.close() calls :

dom.allow_scripts_to_close_windows


Also, nowhere your idea was to reuse such secondary window, to recycle
such secondary window into a customized resized window. In your own
words, the script you had in mind was to create 99 secondary window
which would have to be closed automatically if you had a 100 picture
photo album: that's abusing user system resources in many ways. Nowhere
in your post did you indicate a preference for reusing and recycling a
single secondary window for your photo album purposes/goals.

Although no one said it couldn't be done,

I say it can be done and I say I have done so *_many many months ago_*.

Create a sub-window and dynamically DOM-insert an image
http://www.gtalbot.org/DHTMLSection/DynamicInsertionDOMImageInPopup.html
(although that demo may not be exactly what you need or want)

Opening enlarged images of different dimensions into a single new
separate window only one at a time
http://www.gtalbot.org/DHTMLSection/EnlargeThumbnail.html


the consensus is that I should
stick to the tried and true no risk method,

For a photo album, a slideshow (like S5) is an acceptable solution as
long as you cater for accessibility guidelines.

and create a separate html
page for each larger image, with the caption text.

You did not fully explain what exactly you were looking for to begin
with: you did not at first give the overall picture of what you were
trying to do. You initially/originally focused on that close button and
then later brought up that blur, lost of focus trick to automatically
close the window. That trick is definitely not recommendable because
it's inflexible and it's not a logical response to what the user does. A
window response should be normally adequate (or proportional if you
want), appropriate to what the user's initial behavior, original action
was. The users always associate a browser window response to his own
behavior, action: losing/switching focus has nothing to do with closing
a window.

When you work on a document in a word/text application, switching to
another application should not provoke the closing of your word/text
application. That's true to any window/windowing environment and media
application. David Massy and more and more MS-Windows/MSIE engineers
agree and understand all this.
Closing a window should be in direct response to an user action
deliberately, specifically and explicitly in that sense.
Seems like a lot of wasted space to have a full screen window display a
4cm x 6cm large image with caption.

Well, then a slideshow is a better alternative.

Of course I could make the image
even larger now, if I didn't have to concern myself with the dial-up
download times of these images. (The images have been optimized to be 5
to 15 kb each).

Well that's good. Image quality, reducing number of colors without
reducing image quality and using .png (better compression) is the first
thing to do with all and every images put on a site.

"PNG also compresses better than GIF in almost every case (5% to 25% in
typical cases)."
GIF or PNG
http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/png-gif

In my mostly rural area, only about 30% have high-speed connections, and
my site is mainly for them. Download times do MATTER.

Thanks for all of your help.
Gil


More and more countries are setting standards and guidelines for
reducing the size of webpages too, you know. On January 1st 2006, New
Zealand government has made an accessibility law mandatory to comply
with; one guideline/standard is to make webpage even accessible for
connections of 14.4Kb modem and 9.6Kb modem, exactly because there too
in rural areas there are people with slow connections.

Gérard
 
D

dorayme

Gérard Talbot said:
Nowhere
in your post did you indicate a preference for reusing and recycling a
single secondary window for your photo album purposes/goals.

Which would be the way to go if OP were to have a pop up window
of some kind to display a lot of enlarged pics. I have used them
occasionally using javascript - and this works well for most
people, best to also give alternatives.

OP needs to make up his own mind as to what would be most
convenient to most if not all folk out there given his actual
material.

It is often simpler to forget about the pop up altogether and
just let people go to the enlargement in the same window (you can
always have all or most of the same relevant textual material and
links in the html as from the link page). Let folk use their back
button or the provided navigation controls.

One thing don't do: just follow what people say. See for yourself
how convenient the advice is, test it. Do it one way and live
with it a while. You will see for yourself if you look. Ask a few
users of your actual implementations. The reservations people
around here have will become more meaningful to you, but your
implementation and particular material might still be a good one.
 
N

Neredbojias

With neither quill nor qualm, Jose quothed:
You can have as many popups open at the same time as you want, but they
all have to have different names.
... and who controls the names of the popup windows?
-The [web]pagemaker.

So, the original statement is false. I (the user) cannot have as many
popups open as I want. I can only have as many open as the page
designer will permit me to have.

However, I (the web page designer) can foist pages on the hapless user,
or can prevent him from being able to do what he wants (which is, for
example, to see four different hotel rooms at the same time) if I don't
want him to do that easily.

Well, you (as user) can use a browser with tabs. You can also use a
browser which limits or disables popups. However, I quite agree that a
page author should provide visitors the option whenever offering popups
in the first place. (-With some exceptions like small, decorative/non-
critical windows.)
That turns the computer upside down.

For this reason, I would say that the goal of dictating how windows are
to be opened, used, and closed, is flawed. Let the user decide. Cue
the user as to how to do it, if necessary. And do provide at least a
"next/previous picture" button in the blowup.

Why? What's wrong with the back button? I never use such options for
the very reason that they usually render my back button ineffective with
long, unwanted history.
But don't take over the
user's options.

I agree with the general statement.
 
N

Neredbojias

With neither quill nor qualm, gil quothed:
I guess that there is no elegant way to code a link on a thumbnail to
display a pop up window with larger image and caption when activated.
Although no one said it couldn't be done, the consensus is that I should
stick to the tried and true no risk method, and create a separate html
page for each larger image, with the caption text.

You're mixing apples and oranges. Popup windows aren't needed; you can
created _one_ html document and populate it dynamically using javascript
or server-side methods with whatever content and text you wish - over
and over again. I use a "catch page" via php for all the images on my
site - one page for probably thousands of pics (_and_ text in some
cases.)
Seems like a lot of wasted space to have a full screen window display a
4cm x 6cm large image with caption. Of course I could make the image
even larger now, if I didn't have to concern myself with the dial-up
download times of these images. (The images have been optimized to be 5
to 15 kb each).

In my mostly rural area, only about 30% have high-speed connections, and
my site is mainly for them. Download times do MATTER.

-Which doesn't relate to "wasted space" on a "full screen" window.
 
J

Jose

Well, you (as user) can use a browser with tabs.

Not all users have browser with tabs. And tabs don't solve the problem
introduced by web pages that close themselves unbidden, nor do tabs
allow me to see four pages at the same time, side by side, for comparison.
Why? What's wrong with the back button?

The back button does not take one to the previous picture (in the
sequence), it takes one to the previous page viewed, which is likely the
photo index page. To have to keep going back (and loading, and
scrolling) to go to the next picture is a pain.

Jose
 
G

gil

At approximately 2006/01/17 19:35, Gérard Talbot typed these characters:
gil wrote :



Gil, read again your original post. You'll see that 9 lines out of 13
were about a close button. You got an answer on that, regarding that, etc..
Later, you explained more what you were looking to do. You failed to
give more details on the overall picture of what you wanted to do. You
put too much emphasis on that close button.

For your information, more and more browser manufacturers are
restricting more and more powers of script to play, to "toy with" the
window object. If a script shouldn't open automatically a window, then
why should it be able to close a window or bring it back on top, just
like that?

Mozilla 1.x, Firefox 1.x and Nestscape 7.x all allow users to neutralize
windowRef.close() calls :

dom.allow_scripts_to_close_windows


Also, nowhere your idea was to reuse such secondary window, to recycle
such secondary window into a customized resized window. In your own
words, the script you had in mind was to create 99 secondary window
which would have to be closed automatically if you had a 100 picture
photo album: that's abusing user system resources in many ways. Nowhere
in your post did you indicate a preference for reusing and recycling a
single secondary window for your photo album purposes/goals.




I say it can be done and I say I have done so *_many many months ago_*.

Create a sub-window and dynamically DOM-insert an image
http://www.gtalbot.org/DHTMLSection/DynamicInsertionDOMImageInPopup.html
(although that demo may not be exactly what you need or want)

Opening enlarged images of different dimensions into a single new
separate window only one at a time
http://www.gtalbot.org/DHTMLSection/EnlargeThumbnail.html


the consensus is that I should



For a photo album, a slideshow (like S5) is an acceptable solution as
long as you cater for accessibility guidelines.

and create a separate html



You did not fully explain what exactly you were looking for to begin
with: you did not at first give the overall picture of what you were
trying to do. You initially/originally focused on that close button and
then later brought up that blur, lost of focus trick to automatically
close the window. That trick is definitely not recommendable because
it's inflexible and it's not a logical response to what the user does. A
window response should be normally adequate (or proportional if you
want), appropriate to what the user's initial behavior, original action
was. The users always associate a browser window response to his own
behavior, action: losing/switching focus has nothing to do with closing
a window.

When you work on a document in a word/text application, switching to
another application should not provoke the closing of your word/text
application. That's true to any window/windowing environment and media
application. David Massy and more and more MS-Windows/MSIE engineers
agree and understand all this.
Closing a window should be in direct response to an user action
deliberately, specifically and explicitly in that sense.



Well, then a slideshow is a better alternative.

Of course I could make the image


Well that's good. Image quality, reducing number of colors without
reducing image quality and using .png (better compression) is the first
thing to do with all and every images put on a site.

"PNG also compresses better than GIF in almost every case (5% to 25% in
typical cases)."
GIF or PNG
http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/png-gif





More and more countries are setting standards and guidelines for
reducing the size of webpages too, you know. On January 1st 2006, New
Zealand government has made an accessibility law mandatory to comply
with; one guideline/standard is to make webpage even accessible for
connections of 14.4Kb modem and 9.6Kb modem, exactly because there too
in rural areas there are people with slow connections.

Gérard


Your ".../enlargethumbnail" is very close to what I wanted to do.

Presently, on my site, If the user clicked on another thumb, or anywhere
else in the main window, the pop up disappeared but did not close.
Instead it joined a growing number of relatives behind the main window.
and after a while there were quite a few open windows hidden there, if
I am not mistaken they consume resources.

With your method, a separate close button is not necessary to remind the
user to close the window as only one pop up window is open at any time.
Opening a 'second' window actually closes the first.

I can easily add the caption to the image with photo editing software
such as IrfanView.

Sorry I was not as clear as I could have been, I am still only a novice
and not familiar with the full range of options available within HTML, etc.

Is the javascript code free to use?

Gil
 
G

gil

Gérard,
I wrote you a reply but somehow it got placed under Neredbojias response
instead of yours. Sorry.

I'll try a copy | paste below.

I did bottom post the message but added this top post in case copy-paste
didn't catch formatting correctly.





At approximately 2006/01/17 19:35, Gérard Talbot typed these characters:
gil wrote :



Gil, read again your original post. You'll see that 9 lines out of 13
were about a close button. You got an answer on that, regarding that, etc..
Later, you explained more what you were looking to do. You failed to
give more details on the overall picture of what you wanted to do. You
put too much emphasis on that close button.

For your information, more and more browser manufacturers are
restricting more and more powers of script to play, to "toy with" the
window object. If a script shouldn't open automatically a window, then
why should it be able to close a window or bring it back on top, just
like that?

Mozilla 1.x, Firefox 1.x and Nestscape 7.x all allow users to neutralize
windowRef.close() calls :

dom.allow_scripts_to_close_windows


Also, nowhere your idea was to reuse such secondary window, to recycle
such secondary window into a customized resized window. In your own
words, the script you had in mind was to create 99 secondary window
which would have to be closed automatically if you had a 100 picture
photo album: that's abusing user system resources in many ways. Nowhere
in your post did you indicate a preference for reusing and recycling a
single secondary window for your photo album purposes/goals.




I say it can be done and I say I have done so *_many many months ago_*.

Create a sub-window and dynamically DOM-insert an image
http://www.gtalbot.org/DHTMLSection/DynamicInsertionDOMImageInPopup.html
(although that demo may not be exactly what you need or want)

Opening enlarged images of different dimensions into a single new
separate window only one at a time
http://www.gtalbot.org/DHTMLSection/EnlargeThumbnail.html


the consensus is that I should



For a photo album, a slideshow (like S5) is an acceptable solution as
long as you cater for accessibility guidelines.

and create a separate html



You did not fully explain what exactly you were looking for to begin
with: you did not at first give the overall picture of what you were
trying to do. You initially/originally focused on that close button and
then later brought up that blur, lost of focus trick to automatically
close the window. That trick is definitely not recommendable because
it's inflexible and it's not a logical response to what the user does. A
window response should be normally adequate (or proportional if you
want), appropriate to what the user's initial behavior, original action
was. The users always associate a browser window response to his own
behavior, action: losing/switching focus has nothing to do with closing
a window.

When you work on a document in a word/text application, switching to
another application should not provoke the closing of your word/text
application. That's true to any window/windowing environment and media
application. David Massy and more and more MS-Windows/MSIE engineers
agree and understand all this.
Closing a window should be in direct response to an user action
deliberately, specifically and explicitly in that sense.



Well, then a slideshow is a better alternative.

Of course I could make the image


Well that's good. Image quality, reducing number of colors without
reducing image quality and using .png (better compression) is the first
thing to do with all and every images put on a site.

"PNG also compresses better than GIF in almost every case (5% to 25% in
typical cases)."
GIF or PNG
http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/png-gif





More and more countries are setting standards and guidelines for
reducing the size of webpages too, you know. On January 1st 2006, New
Zealand government has made an accessibility law mandatory to comply
with; one guideline/standard is to make webpage even accessible for
connections of 14.4Kb modem and 9.6Kb modem, exactly because there too
in rural areas there are people with slow connections.

Gérard


Your ".../enlargethumbnail" is very close to what I wanted to do.

Presently, on my site, If the user clicked on another thumb, or anywhere
else in the main window, the pop up disappeared but did not close.
Instead it joined a growing number of relatives behind the main window.
and after a while there were quite a few open windows hidden there, if
I am not mistaken they consume resources.

With your method, a separate close button is not necessary to remind the
user to close the window as only one pop up window is open at any time.
Opening a 'second' window actually closes the first.

I can easily add the caption to the image with photo editing software
such as IrfanView.

Sorry I was not as clear as I could have been, I am still only a novice
and not familiar with the full range of options available within HTML, etc.

Is the javascript code free to use?

Gil
 
D

dorayme

Jose said:
... nor do tabs
allow me to see four pages at the same time, side by side, for comparison.

Oddly enough, one of the main reasons I like tabs is that I can
compare things, even photos. Yes I know, not absolutely side by
side, but for some purposes the comparison is more effective in
tabs especially if the pics are same size and in same position.
The back button does not take one to the previous picture (in the
sequence), it takes one to the previous page viewed, which is likely the
photo index page. To have to keep going back (and loading, and
scrolling) to go to the next picture is a pain.

Yes, it is often convenient to have internal navigation thru
pics...
 
?

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard_Talbot?=

gil wrote :
At approximately 2006/01/17 19:35, Gérard Talbot typed these characters:

Your ".../enlargethumbnail" is very close to what I wanted to do.

Presently, on my site, If the user clicked on another thumb, or anywhere
else in the main window, the pop up disappeared but did not close.
Instead it joined a growing number of relatives behind the main window.
and after a while there were quite a few open windows hidden there, if
I am not mistaken they consume resources.

With your method, a separate close button is not necessary to remind the
user to close the window as only one pop up window is open at any time.
Opening a 'second' window actually closes the first.


Yes and no. The current (what you refer to first) window will close only
if the url is different.

If same url, then the window is brought up back on top, is focus()-ed,
which is efficient use of the user's system resources.


Still several considerations favor slideshows over that script:
1- Mozilla 1.x, Firefox 1.x, Opera 7+ have an user preference to disable
focus() command. So, (workaround) your page must indicate to set Allow
scripts to: Raise or lower windows checkbox to checked
2- Your page *must clearly and explicitly indicate* that only 1
secondary window is opened and then recycled, reused for the photo album
gallery when he does a normal left click on thumbnails. The user can
always open any enlarged image in a distinct, separate window by doing
right-click and then choosing open in a new window or even open in a new
tab. So the script is flexible, user-friendly and also
javascript-support independent.
3- Slideshows can use rel="prefetch" feature which then would/will be
most likely faster (more user resources friendly, efficient) than
opening a secondary window.
4- The script can not overcome special user setting/theme/preference
like width of scrollbars: this is already mentioned in the script comments.
5- If the url is different but the image size are the same, then the
window should not close and be re-created; it should load the new image
in the current window. The script currently does not do that: I just
realized this today.

If I were you, I'd look for S5 slideshow:
(I believe S5 refers to Simple Slideshow Standards-compliant Speed
Usable/Accessible)

S5: A Simple Standards-Based Slide Show System
http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/tools/s5/

HOWTO: Creating an S5 Slideshow
http://www.courseforum.com/howto_slideshow.html

An open-source web-based slideshow application
http://s5presents.com/
I can easily add the caption to the image with photo editing software
such as IrfanView.

I would not do that. Otherwise you make your text less accessible, less
interoperable (think of people who would copy-N-paste your text, or save
such text, others who would want their browser to submit such text to a
translating feature or site, etc.)

The Biggest Web Design Mistakes of 2004 (Part 2 of 2)
Don't use graphics for text
9. Forgetting the purpose of text.
http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/biggest-web-design-mistakes-in-2004-part2.html

You can watermark your name with IrfanView along with some copyright
notice in your image: that's good and ok.
An excellent example showing perfectly what I have in mind:
http://www.foxes.org/urbanfox/fox_11z.jpg

Sorry I was not as clear as I could have been, I am still only a novice
and not familiar with the full range of options available within HTML, etc.

Ok. No problem.
Is the javascript code free to use?

Gil

Good question (I do not get this question asked enough/often). Yes, it's
free. Just mention my webpage and my name as contribution and author at
the beginning of the script.

Gérard
 
N

Neredbojias

With neither quill nor qualm, Jose quothed:
Not all users have browser with tabs. And tabs don't solve the problem
introduced by web pages that close themselves unbidden, nor do tabs
allow me to see four pages at the same time, side by side, for comparison.

It sounds to me like you're wanting javascript. Javascript can do all
that and more.
The back button does not take one to the previous picture (in the
sequence), it takes one to the previous page viewed, which is likely the
photo index page. To have to keep going back (and loading, and
scrolling) to go to the next picture is a pain.

A page with thumbs is a back-and-forth operation. If you return from a
pic, the _forward_ button is required to go "back" to it, but, of
course, this is valid for a single level only. If you "sequence" your
images as you suggest, you can indeed have the behavior _you_ want, but
who else wants it? I, for one, don't want to have to go back thru all
the pics I just viewed simply to return to the prior page.
 
J

Jose

It sounds to me like you're wanting javascript. Javascript can do all
that and more.

No, I'm not wanting javascript. I'm wanting ordinary HTML links that do
ordinary things, and let ME (the user) do what I want with those things.
A page with thumbs is a back-and-forth operation. If you return from a
pic, the _forward_ button is required to go "back" to it, but, of
course, this is valid for a single level only. If you "sequence" your
images as you suggest, you can indeed have the behavior _you_ want, but
who else wants it? I, for one, don't want to have to go back thru all
the pics I just viewed simply to return to the prior page.

On the thumbs page, I should be able to click on a pic and go to a pic
page. From there, BACK will take me back to the thumbs page, but there
is no browser function that will take me to the next pic. That's where
a button on the pic page [next-->] comes in handy. [<--prev] is equally
useful, and [^back to thumbs^], while redundant with the browser back
button, nicely completes the set.

Jose
 
?

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E9rard_Talbot?=

Gérard Talbot a écrit :
5- If the url is different but the image size are the same, then the
window should not close and be re-created; it should load the new image
in the current window. The script currently does not do that: I just
realized this today.

I corrected the demo to take into consideration this issue/aspect. I
have not tested my code additions with 2 images of same dimensions ...
but it should work. Let me know if it does not.

Good question (I do not get this question asked enough/often). Yes, it's
free. Just mention my webpage and my name as contribution and author at
the beginning of the script.

I edited a copyright notice
http://www.gtalbot.org/Varia/CopyrightNotice.html

Gérard
 
N

Neredbojias

With neither quill nor qualm, Jose quothed:
It sounds to me like you're wanting javascript. Javascript can do all
that and more.

No, I'm not wanting javascript. I'm wanting ordinary HTML links that do
ordinary things, and let ME (the user) do what I want with those things.
A page with thumbs is a back-and-forth operation. If you return from a
pic, the _forward_ button is required to go "back" to it, but, of
course, this is valid for a single level only. If you "sequence" your
images as you suggest, you can indeed have the behavior _you_ want, but
who else wants it? I, for one, don't want to have to go back thru all
the pics I just viewed simply to return to the prior page.

On the thumbs page, I should be able to click on a pic and go to a pic
page. From there, BACK will take me back to the thumbs page, but there
is no browser function that will take me to the next pic. That's where
a button on the pic page [next-->] comes in handy. [<--prev] is equally
useful, and [^back to thumbs^], while redundant with the browser back
button, nicely completes the set.

Jose

Well, you can do that. Have a catch page with a link to the next pic on
it. You can even control the history by using the javascript "replace"
option. If you wish to avoid javascript, server-side scripting will do
all but maybe the history thing.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
473,995
Messages
2,570,236
Members
46,822
Latest member
israfaceZa

Latest Threads

Top