On 12/27/06, Parag Jagdale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So the company I am working for suggests the use of one of the
> Javascript+CSS rounded corners solutions. But I myself do not believe
> in using Javascript for pure presentation, and I believe that
> sacrificing the bandwidth to load all this JS is not worth the
> benefit.
>
> On the other hand, the solution I currently have is also a little
> complex and heavy. It uses 3 images and 3 DIV layers. The header and
> footer images in total probably take more bandwidth than the JS in the
> other solution. The benefit I see in this solution is that there is no
> 3rd party (no JS to worry about). There are only DIV layers and CSS
> classes that are already defined, so no JS is involved in
> presentation.
> Another benefit is that I can give the boxes any type of shadowing and
> patterns in Photoshop to make the style of the boxes match the rest of
> the site.
>
> What do you think?
>
> <div class="portalBox">
> <div class="portalBox_head">Search Colleges</div>
>
>
> </div>
> <div class="portalBox_foot"></div>
>
> portalBox: is a vertically repeating image
>
> portalBox_head: a fixed width and height rectangle which has a non
> repeating image with the top left and right corners rounded
>
> portalBox_foot: a fixed width and height rectangle which has a non
> repeating image with the bottom left and right corners rounded
>
> div.portalBox{
> float:left;
> width: 524px;
> text-align:left;
> background-image: url(../images/portals/portalBox_blue_re.jpg);
> background-repeat: repeat-y;
> }
> div.portalBox_head{
> width: 524px;
> height: 25px;
> float:left;
> background-image: url(../images/portals/portalBox_blue_head.jpg);
> background-repeat: no-repeat;
> text-align:left;
> font-size:14px;
> font-weight: bold;
> color: #333;
> padding: 0.6em 1em;
> margin:0;
>
>
> }
> div.portalBox_foot{
> float:left;
> width: 524px;
> height: 12px;
> background-image: url(../images/portals/portalBox_blue_foot.jpg);
> background-repeat: no-repeat;
> }
>
>
> What I want to know is am i just being stubborn about not using an
> easier solution(The JS), or am I right saying that the solution is too
> complex and no JS should be involved?
>
> If there is a better no JS solution, im all ears!
>
> Thank You,
> Parag Jagdale
> ______________________________________________________________________
> css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
> IE7 information -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7
> List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
> Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
>
When I came across this problem I thought, just look at what the
javascript does, and use that directly: it manipulates the DOM and
inserts spans and divs, as far as I remember. These have classes which
produce the appearance of rounded corners.
I don't know how this would compare to what you have assembled.
In general, I don't think it is wise to let the page appear
differently when javascript is turned off.
If you are generating the page with PHP, or Rails, or Java, etc. a
"helper" method could do the rounding on the server side, instead of
the browser.
Stephan
--
Stephan Wehner
> http://stephan.sugarmotor.org
> http://stephansmap.org
> http://www.trafficlife.com
> http://www.buckmaster.ca
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
IE7 information -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
