Comments on: Useful? Sure seems like it could be. Fun? YES.

Useful? Sure seems like it could be. Fun? YES.

gummo — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:07:42 -0800

COOL Javascript Trickery. Useful? Sure seems like it could be, though I can't think how. Fun? YES!

By: gummo

gummo — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:09:24 -0800

You can go up and try the first few, but I linked to the fun one. The bunny one.

By: jeremias

jeremias — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:10:00 -0800

Why can't the bicyclists run over the bunnies, dammit! (Seriously, this is pretty cool, tho I'm scared to even look at the code.)

By: BlackLeotardFront

BlackLeotardFront — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:16:08 -0800

The implications of this technology on pornography are staggering. If your changes were viewable to the world it would be more useful, like the Just Letters post of a month or two ago.

By: rafter

rafter — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 14:12:22 -0800

This has been around quite a while (on the linked site, the divs are even resizable).

By: patgas

patgas — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 14:21:53 -0800

I once had a friend who had an entire reinactment of Super Mario Bros. set up through javascript that would play along the bottom of your browser. That was four years ago, I'm sure it's much easier to do those kinds of things nowadays. If I had a need to. Ever.

By: yerfatma

yerfatma — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 15:06:54 -0800

YoungPup has a drag-n-drop library as well.

By: matildaben

matildaben — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 15:08:49 -0800

Read about ajax for a more in-depth look at using JavaScript and DHTML for rich client interactivity.

By: Wolfdog

Wolfdog — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 15:09:03 -0800

I enjoy making the recumbent bicyclist dive into the gaping maw of the german shepherd.

By: Tullius

Tullius — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 15:41:30 -0800

I think it would be useful for those sites which advertise with layered images. I usually have to bump the text size up to read (bring me my spectacles and ear-trumpet, Junior!), and halfway down the article, I have a Verizon ad blocking the view.

By: bitdamaged

bitdamaged — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 15:51:22 -0800

Ajax has nothing to do with this type of DHTML (well that's not fair, it could but not really). Not to mention Ajax is just a stupid pretty name put on the XMLHTTPRequest object. Actually none of this is very new and could be done for a long time.

By: carsonb

carsonb — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 16:03:27 -0800

"Actually none of this is very new and could be done for a long time." yeah, but it's cool. and, as Tullius pointed out one instance, applicable, so it's nice to hear about, specially since it's not seen often.

By: furtive

furtive — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 16:25:12 -0800

old news, nothing to see here.

By: spock

spock — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 16:28:14 -0800

Did y'all see the drag 'n' drop shopping cart at Panic.com (written by MeFite cabel) and the related MeFi discussion ??? Perhaps he can tell us how much this library inspired him?

By: FieldingGoodney

FieldingGoodney — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 17:00:26 -0800

Huh? Draggable layers have been around since at least 1998. What's new here?

By: cabel

cabel — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 17:09:12 -0800

Actually, I've never seen this library, but I sure do enjoy dragging that recumbent bicycle all over the damn place! Every web page should have a recumbent bicycle on it! After digging around a bit it looks like a good set of well written and object-oriented functions to make drag and drop Javascripting much easier. I imagine it'd be a great head start for a project. I only wonder if the full library might be overkill for simpler tasks (you can get basic drag and drop going in just a couple of functions), and that the dragging seems a little choppy in Safari?

By: crabcakes

crabcakes — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 17:26:30 -0800

WalterZorn rocks. We use some of his line-drawing techniques for some of our sites here (can't get into specifics, unfortunately, but let's just say that charts are involved). There's room for optimizations in his scripts, but he covers the principles in a way that few others do. Oh, and Ajax? Schmoozy name for a slick-yet-basic concept that's been used for years.

By: substrate

substrate — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 17:52:17 -0800

I'm sorry, but the bunnies need more pancakes.

By: wolftrouble

wolftrouble — Tue, 15 Mar 2005 22:11:50 -0800

You know, YoungPup.net really did not have the sort of content I was ~~hoping for~~ expecting.

By: salmacis

salmacis — Wed, 16 Mar 2005 01:13:53 -0800

Didn't work on Firefox, but worked on Konqueror. What's up with this? I saw this with the fractal mazes as well. Is there a problem with the Firefox JavaScript implementation?

By: spock

spock — Wed, 16 Mar 2005 05:26:52 -0800

For some other cool javascript trickery see Google's homage to OS X page. Hint: hover over the images

By: defcom1

defcom1 — Wed, 16 Mar 2005 06:20:01 -0800

Didn't work on Firefox, but worked on Konqueror. What's up with this? I saw this with the fractal mazes as well. Is there a problem with the Firefox JavaScript implementation? Works fine on my copy. (WinXP sp 1 firefox 1.0.1)

By: catachresoid

catachresoid — Wed, 16 Mar 2005 07:46:13 -0800

Didn't work on Firefox, but worked on Konqueror. What's up with this? Is Tools>options>Web Features>Enable Javascript checked?

By: bh

bh — Wed, 16 Mar 2005 10:28:16 -0800

salmacis - blackdown java or sun's jre? I never did get blackdown to work properly. Getting java working correctly on my laptop was more difficult than acpi (which still doesn't quite work). Gentoo, Firefox 1.0.