4 ms·
I understand it is a very neat piece of CSS scripting, but how does this compare to a simple animated GIF from practical perspective?
by abcd_f 15y ago
I understand it is a very neat piece of CSS scripting, but how does this compare to a simple animated GIF from practical perspective?
- cosgroveb 15y agoWell you could script it to change the rate of pulsing in JS I guess... Still don't think this is very exciting anyways. Why the png and not pure a pure css icon for instance (although that's not very interesting to me either)?
- rocktronica 15y agoCSS beats graphics because it can be changed programatically. Browser supporting, _all_ the parameters can be changed to suit the rest of the UI. If the designer writes their CSS in browser like I do, it's instantaneous and immensely powerful. With images, it's, well, you know, slower.
- pharrington 15y agoGIF's don't support alpha transparency, making them the opposite of practical for an effect like this.
- 0x12 15y agoAt least GIFs work more or less the same on all browsers. This is an excellent example of how not to do it. Imagine the support call: "Click on the blinking dot" : "I don't see any blinking dot" : "It blinks for me, do you use a webkit browser?" : "A what?"