005 Comments

001

hmm.. this sure looks good. I normally just have my roll-overs in one image and move the position on hover.

Author
Gareth
Posted
Nov 20th, 2006 12:40 pm
002

Seems like one of those “we have AJAX because it’s cool” sort of things.

Author
shorty114
Posted
Nov 20th, 2006 6:37 pm
003

Not really necessary, but shorty114 said it’s cool, isn’t it?

What’s really necessary I ask? JavaScript, HTML, the Internet?

What’s the meaning of life?

Author
Mr.Pixel
Posted
Nov 21st, 2006 1:42 am
004

crapy solution better do is the css way (via ajaxian.com);

* html {filter: expression(document.execCommand("BackgroundImageCache", false, true));}

and to shauninman:

Is all that Ajax really necessary Mr. Pixel?

is uncalled for since your site has always been slow due to bloated scripting nor does it work well with IE… like its that hard to apply some css filters.

Author
webdev
Posted
Nov 21st, 2006 5:59 am
005

Mr. Pixel: 42

webdev: The JavaScript version of the fix is recommended over the CSS filter for performance reasons (see the second update here).

I won’t argue that my site “has always been slow due to bloated scripting.” That’s not the case anymore though is it? The Ajax dig may have been “uncalled for” but it seems silly that another site has a more coherent and concise explanation of the technique in a single blog post.

Author
Shaun Inman
Posted
Nov 21st, 2006 9:38 am