[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lynx-dev Java script support.
From: |
brian j pardy |
Subject: |
Re: lynx-dev Java script support. |
Date: |
Tue, 29 Jun 1999 21:21:54 -0400 |
On Tue, Jun 29, 1999, Heather Stern wrote:
> me >> [...]
> >> I think these features are -
> >> * mouseovers
> >> - some sites don't bother with ALT, but they do have
> >> a good mouseover status line
>
> bjp > How about, in lieu of Javascript (not saying never Javascript, but in
> > > > the indefinite time until we have it), something to just fake an ALT
> > > > tag for a mouseover, if there is no ALT tag?
>
> Mouseovers come in two flavors, well three maybe. Status line rewrites,
> image replacement, and a popup (possibly in another frame).
I figure the only one we'd be too concerned (if we're talking fakejs
as an intermediate step) with would be flavor 1, I don't know flavor 2
would be implemented (have a link change when it becomes the focus?
Yuck.)
> I think you'll find a fairly short, clean sample of flavor 1, and maybe
> flavor to, at Ender's Realm Grphic Design:
> http://www.ender-design.com/home/
>
> Pleasantly enough, the site is quite clean to the non-graphical eye.
I'll give it a look.
<pause>
Oh dear. That's much more complex then I thought it was going to be.
I'm not sure if I'm familiar enough with Lynx internals (and
definitely not with Javascript) to try to implement enough to fake
this part.
I wasn't aware that functions could be embedded into mouseover (now
that I think about it, duh). It'd basically need to be an actual JS
interpreter.
> me > I was sort of vaguely thinking, if we had the "lynx can do a limited
> > > number or type of pseudo-graphical things" stub, and something to spot
> > > that the HTML/js author is trying to do such a thing, we could fake it.
>
> bjp> I don't know anything about js -- is the syntax for a mouseover pretty
> > much just something in the <IMG> tag somewhere? If it's something
> > like that, can try to find the 'mouseover=' text and splice out what's
> > in quotes after it (dealing with backslashed quotes, etc).
>
> Look at the raw code for the site above. It seems to memorize a few strings
> for use later during mouseovers. The actual mouseover= is the name of the
> script to invoke, so you probably don't want that.
Gotcha there. Hrm. Since mouseover= can be a function, we nearly
need an interpreter to attempt to do anything with this.
> me > To be "real" mouseover (?!) for the scenario I described, lemme see, I'd
> > > imagine: The image doens't display (of course) and there's no ALT so
> > > assuming you have the feature on, we show the graphic's filename. When
> > > it become hot, we'd honor the mouseover and redraw the page? I don't
> > > think so. More likely, "fake javascript" would steal yet another screen
> > > line for its status,
>
> bjp> As an easier (and less demanding on screen realestate, and in keeping
> > with how annoying mouseover truly IS (heh)), how about if a mouseover
> > just did a temporary message over the existing status line, using the
> > facilities we currently have? Could do something like have it write
> > with the same precedence as informational messages (JSSECS=0 ? Ouch.)
> > or something.
>
> Bearing in mind that as an Advanced user, I like to know what my destination
> URL is, I'd kinda like it to switch back afterwards. Of course = will show
> it to me, but I do hope I wouldn't have to start doing that all the time.
If it were a line along the lines of the info message you get when you
try to page past the end of a page, it'd paint onto the screen and
then go away, restoring old status line (I *think*) when done.
> > > and might be initially stubbed to show what it is
> > > guessing rather than try to actually do anything new with js code.
>
> I still think this would be useful for other features than merely mouseover,
> although heck, not everyone is going to turn it on, right?
If I knew more about the language than I do (um, next to nil) I'd
comment on that.
> For me two lines is still ok, my Advanced URL/status and this debug/js gadget
> would still be fine with me.
I'm not even positive now I could do anything with this. I was
thinking something much more basic, along the lines of tearing a
string out of an IMG tag.
Well...the SO wants a JS book, maybe I'll have to read it first...
> > Ideas always help.
>
> Thanks :)
Didn't mean to get anyone's hopes up -- but mine were. Maybe we've
inspired someone else that has a better understanding of JS...
--
My best argument against discrimination is quite simple:
Does it really matter if the ABC people are inferior to the DEF people if
they can tell one end of a gun from the other?
- lynx-dev Java script support., Igor B. Poretsky, 1999/06/25
- Re: lynx-dev Java script support., Kim DeVaughn, 1999/06/25
- Re: lynx-dev Java script support., David Woolley, 1999/06/27
- Re: lynx-dev Java script support., Larry W. Virden, 1999/06/27
- Re: lynx-dev Java script support., Rob Partington, 1999/06/27
- Re: lynx-dev Java script support., Heather Stern, 1999/06/29
- Re: lynx-dev Java script support., brian j pardy, 1999/06/29
- Re: lynx-dev Java script support., Heather Stern, 1999/06/29
- Re: lynx-dev Java script support., brian j pardy, 1999/06/29
- Re: lynx-dev Java script support., Heather Stern, 1999/06/29
- Re: lynx-dev Java script support.,
brian j pardy <=
- Re: lynx-dev Java script support., David Woolley, 1999/06/28