11 ms·

You can put jwz's blink in your browser profile's userContent.css to make it work on all websites: @keyframes blink { 0% { opacity:1; } 75% { opa

by ivank 13y ago

You can put jwz's blink in your browser profile's userContent.css to make it work on all websites: @keyframes blink { 0% { opacity:1; } 75% { opacity:1; } 76% { opacity:0; } 100% { opacity:0; }} blink { text-decoration: inherit; animation: blink 0.75s ease-in infinite alternate; } (Though it will work a little differently than the native <blink>, as the CSS makes non-text elements blink as well.)

AaronFriel 13y ago
Thank god we can finally blink non-text elements. The glorious HTML5/CSS3 future is upon is.
AsymetricCom 13y ago
Technically, this isn't the right solution, but I appreciate the suggestion. Firefox should honor HTML standard and add it back, and add an option in about::config or some other dialog and disable it there if they think it should be disabled by default.
- ivank 13y ago
  It's not in any HTML standard, but strangely there is a joke DTD on w3.org with BLINK: http://www.w3.org/Style/HTML40-plus-blink.dtd http://www.w3.org/Style/HTML40-plus-blink.dtd
  - dasmoth 13y ago
    On the other hand, "text-decoration: blink" (which has also been killed in Firefox) is standard CSS (although the standard does go on to kind-of suggest not implementing it...) http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/text.html#lining-striking-props http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/text.html#lining-striking-props
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- beggi 13y ago
  I suggest you read this :) http://seriouspony.com/blog/2013/7/24/your-app-makes-me-fat http://seriouspony.com/blog/2013/7/24/your-app-makes-me-fat
  - Rylinks 13y ago
    Adding another option to about:config that most users will never need or see does not cause cognitive load in any real sense.
    - benatkin 13y ago
      Perhaps consider the open-closed principle and whether it should be a setting or a third-party extension.
- moocowduckquack 13y ago
  Blink was never a standard. Lou Montulli thought up the idea while drunk and then someone else implemented it for a joke. "When we released Netscape Navigator 1.0 we did not document the blink functionality in any way, and for a while all was quiet. Then somewhere, somehow the arcane knowledge of blinking leaked into the real world and suddenly everything was blinking. "Look here", "buy this", "check this out", all blinking. Large advertisements blinking in all their glory. It was a lot like Las Vegas, except it was on my screen, with no way of turning it off. In the end, much was said, most of it in the form of flaming posts to various discussion boards, and the <blink> tag will probably be remembered as the most hated of all HTML tags. I would like to publicly state that at no time did I actually write code or even seriously advocate for the <blink> tag. It is true that I put forth the initial inspiration, but it really was merely a thought experiment. I am not going to name any names of the people who coded the dastardly deed, if they wish to step forward, they will need to do it themselves." http://www.montulli.org/theoriginofthe%3Cblink%3Etag http://www.montulli.org/theoriginofthe%3Cblink%3Etag Also, firefox used to have an option in about:config to allow the blink tag to be turned off.
  - copiga 13y ago
    <blink> as the most hated? what about <marquee>?
- jlebar 13y ago
  The humor of this joke is in how many people (perhaps including its author!) take it seriously.
aegiso 13y ago
Just an FYI: you can use step timing functions to obviate the need for the 1% change hack :).
Contra 13y ago
https://github.com/wearefractal/blink-polyfill https://github.com/wearefractal/blink-polyfill is more comprehensive
brudgers 13y ago
The problem framed by JWZ is not a technical one. It is a social one, and centered upon values. Eliminating <blink> changes the existing content of the web. There's a reasonable argument that that is a bad thing - again one based on values not technology. To put it another way, <blink> has meaning by virtue of its history. Its presence on a page says something to the viewer - not something technical but something cultural. <blink>'s removal does not make the web richer or more meaningful. Instead, its removal does something quite the opposite. I won't say that it is vandalism - but it does wantonly alter the expression of existing web content, and does so to the very content that is most in danger of being lost to history. It neuters what makes some web pages representative of their time and place.
- derleth 13y ago
  Blink's removal makes the Web less likely to make people sick. Epileptics have a terrible time with flashing things.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- bringbackblink 13y ago
  This is right on. Bring back the blink tag www.iwantmyblinktagback.com
- Tichy 13y ago
  Lots of mediums have gone extinct - tapes, punch cards, what not. To view them now, one has to get a capable device. Maybe to see some old web sites in all their glory we just need to download Mosaic again. Perhaps someone will even make a Javascript emulator of Mosaic. It happened for other things, like C64 games. I think something can be said for getting rid of useless stuff in a codebase.
- michielvoo 13y ago
  I think we shouldn't expect historic pages to work in modern browsers. As long as we can reliably run older browsers we can also view historic pages as they were once rendered.

by ivank 13y ago

AaronFriel 13y ago

Thank god we can finally blink non-text elements. The glorious HTML5/CSS3 future is upon is.

AsymetricCom 13y ago

Technically, this isn't the right solution, but I appreciate the suggestion. Firefox should honor HTML standard and add it back, and add an option in about::config or some other dialog and disable it there if they think it should be disabled by default.

ivank 13y ago
It's not in any HTML standard, but strangely there is a joke DTD on w3.org with BLINK: http://www.w3.org/Style/HTML40-plus-blink.dtd http://www.w3.org/Style/HTML40-plus-blink.dtd
- dasmoth 13y ago
  On the other hand, "text-decoration: blink" (which has also been killed in Firefox) is standard CSS (although the standard does go on to kind-of suggest not implementing it...) http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/text.html#lining-striking-props http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/text.html#lining-striking-props
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
beggi 13y ago
I suggest you read this :) http://seriouspony.com/blog/2013/7/24/your-app-makes-me-fat http://seriouspony.com/blog/2013/7/24/your-app-makes-me-fat
- Rylinks 13y ago
  Adding another option to about:config that most users will never need or see does not cause cognitive load in any real sense.
  - benatkin 13y ago
    Perhaps consider the open-closed principle and whether it should be a setting or a third-party extension.
moocowduckquack 13y ago
Blink was never a standard. Lou Montulli thought up the idea while drunk and then someone else implemented it for a joke. "When we released Netscape Navigator 1.0 we did not document the blink functionality in any way, and for a while all was quiet. Then somewhere, somehow the arcane knowledge of blinking leaked into the real world and suddenly everything was blinking. "Look here", "buy this", "check this out", all blinking. Large advertisements blinking in all their glory. It was a lot like Las Vegas, except it was on my screen, with no way of turning it off. In the end, much was said, most of it in the form of flaming posts to various discussion boards, and the <blink> tag will probably be remembered as the most hated of all HTML tags. I would like to publicly state that at no time did I actually write code or even seriously advocate for the <blink> tag. It is true that I put forth the initial inspiration, but it really was merely a thought experiment. I am not going to name any names of the people who coded the dastardly deed, if they wish to step forward, they will need to do it themselves." http://www.montulli.org/theoriginofthe%3Cblink%3Etag http://www.montulli.org/theoriginofthe%3Cblink%3Etag Also, firefox used to have an option in about:config to allow the blink tag to be turned off.
- copiga 13y ago
  <blink> as the most hated? what about <marquee>?
jlebar 13y ago
The humor of this joke is in how many people (perhaps including its author!) take it seriously.

aegiso 13y ago

Just an FYI: you can use step timing functions to obviate the need for the 1% change hack :).

Contra 13y ago

https://github.com/wearefractal/blink-polyfill https://github.com/wearefractal/blink-polyfill is more comprehensive

brudgers 13y ago

The problem framed by JWZ is not a technical one. It is a social one, and centered upon values. Eliminating <blink> changes the existing content of the web. There's a reasonable argument that that is a bad thing - again one based on values not technology. To put it another way, <blink> has meaning by virtue of its history. Its presence on a page says something to the viewer - not something technical but something cultural. <blink>'s removal does not make the web richer or more meaningful. Instead, its removal does something quite the opposite. I won't say that it is vandalism - but it does wantonly alter the expression of existing web content, and does so to the very content that is most in danger of being lost to history. It neuters what makes some web pages representative of their time and place.

derleth 13y ago
Blink's removal makes the Web less likely to make people sick. Epileptics have a terrible time with flashing things.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
bringbackblink 13y ago
This is right on. Bring back the blink tag www.iwantmyblinktagback.com
Tichy 13y ago
Lots of mediums have gone extinct - tapes, punch cards, what not. To view them now, one has to get a capable device. Maybe to see some old web sites in all their glory we just need to download Mosaic again. Perhaps someone will even make a Javascript emulator of Mosaic. It happened for other things, like C64 games. I think something can be said for getting rid of useless stuff in a codebase.
michielvoo 13y ago
I think we shouldn't expect historic pages to work in modern browsers. As long as we can reliably run older browsers we can also view historic pages as they were once rendered.