The dev list is down right now, the move to the new server has take a
toll on us.
--John
On 5/11/07, bhagany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I tried making a ticket in the bug tracker, and it seemed to work, but
it's not showing up when I try to view the ticket reports. I'm kind
of new at this - anybody have any advice? Also, I keep on trying to
sign up for the dev mailing list, but I get a 404 every time I find a
link to it. What's up with that?
On May 11, 3:08 pm, bhagany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> After I posted, I realized that first paragraph is a little
> outdated... so disregard the stuff that doesn't seem to make sense.
>
> On May 11, 3:05 pm, bhagany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Okay, I've been fooling around with this all day, and I think I have
> > narrowed down the problem, but I'm not sure what to do about it. It's
> > actually a few problems, and it's mostly in Interface, but just in
> > case anybody has the same problems, I'll post my solution here.
>
> > I stepped through the script several times with Firebug, and
> > eventually found this in the jQuery.fx.slide method in ifxslide.js,
> > line 240:
>
> > z.el.show();
>
> > In this context, z.el is the element you want to slide, wrapped in a
> > jQuery object. I couldn't see any particular logic for having a
> > show() here, so I commented it out. It still works fine as far as I
> > can tell, but the flicker persisted. So, I dug deeper, into the
> > jQuery.fx.buildWrapper method (which is called by jQuery.fx.slide),
> > and found this on lines 109-112 of ifx.js:
>
> > if (restoreStyle) {
> > t.hide();
> > es.visibility = oldVisibility;
>
> > }
>
> > t is your slide element wrapped in jQuery, and es is the style
> > property of the same element. Turns out the flicker happens when the
> > element is set to display:block and visibility:none, restoreStyle is
> > true, and oldVisibility is "visible". In this situation the hide
> > method doesn't actually do anything, because the first thing it does
> > is a filter(":visible"), which filters out our element because the
> > visibility is set to none. What we actually want in this situation is
> > for display to get set to none. So, I just replaced
>
> > t.hide();
>
> > with
>
> > es.display = "none";
>
> > This works like a charm, no more flicker. However, I'm not sure if
> > this breaks things in other situations. I'll be heading over to the
> > Interface site to address this issue, and see if we can get a
> > permanent fix into official release.
>
> > Brent
>
> > On May 11, 10:00 am, Equand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > the divs, u should look into divs position, position them absolutely,
> > > or add another div with a strict size which doesn't slide, because on
> > > relative position when it slides - it's height or width changes, so
> > > the previous div gets into place...
>
> > > On May 11, 4:49 pm, bhagany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > I've spent awhile searching for a solution in the archives, but have
> > > > been unable to find one, so I finally bit the bullet and joined the
> > > > group to ask about it.
>
> > > > Here's the situation: I've got two divs, one starts out set to
> > > > display:none, the other is display:block. When a link is clicked, I
> > > > want the visible div to slide out, and the previously hidden div to
> > > > slide in in the same spot. This works, except for a flicker that
> > > > happens only some of the time. Usually, the div that should be
> > > > sliding in appears for a split second, and then disappears again when
> > > > it starts the slide. You can see the page I'm working on
athttp://hagany.homeip.net:10480/draft/makeDraft.php. I've slowed the
> > > > slide down to highlight the flicker - remember you may have to click
> > > > the link a few times to see the flicker.
>
> > > > I am already using 1.1.2. Also, I found a thread that suggested that
> > > > perhaps the problem was with Interface, and not jQuery itself, but the
> > > > thread was a few months old, and not very clear. If I should be
> > > > directing this question elsewhere, just let me know.
>
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Brent
