5 ms·
These are idiotic, and should all be done on the back-end -- either by your favorite image program before you upload your image, or by some server-side code --
by thaumaturgy 17y ago
These are idiotic, and should all be done on the back-end -- either by your favorite image program before you upload your image, or by some server-side code -- and they add nothing of value to the website.
By contrast, check out the JS effects integrated into a site I did for a client: http://davidmckayphotography.com/ http://davidmckayphotography.com/ (I didn't do the site design or layout, just the photo gallery/JS bits).
- timmaah 17y agoNice.. but it is not "Unobtrusive JavaScript" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unobtrusive_JavaScript http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unobtrusive_JavaScript
- thaumaturgy 17y agoWhoops, you're right, it's not. I'm currently working on a new version which actually would be.
- NathanKP 17y agoI agree. I see no need to waste bandwidth and page size with an external library to add an image curl. If I wanted that I would add it using my favorite image editing program. The JavaScript image processing libraries he mention also make the image grainy. I'm really not impressed. If there is one possibly "essential" javascript effect it would be the spinning ajax indicator or a progress indicator for uploads and other time intensive operations. None of the "effects" mentioned by the author are anywhere near "essential."