Any way to get around the need for the metadata plugin? I am trying to keep included scripts light.
On Mar 20, 3:23 pm, "Diego A." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For reference: The issue was relative positioning in IE. > I worked around it with a negative margin. > > On Mar 20, 6:29 pm, "Diego A." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I had tried that but it didn't work reliably in IE. It was a CSS > > issue. But hey, I think I've fixed it, in which case the only issue > > with prototype B will be resolved. > > > Check it out:http://www.fyneworks.com/jquery/star-rating/ > > > On Mar 19, 10:08 pm, AsymF <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Why can't the background-color value just be set to transparent? > > > > On Mar 16, 5:28 pm, timothytoe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > B is the more interesting path for development--that's for sure. You > > > > could always do both. Do B as far as you can take it, then maybe some > > > > clever solution will occur to you to get the same functionality over > > > > any background. > > > > > On Mar 16, 11:10 am, "Diego A." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Timothy, thanks for the feedback. THAT is exactly the issue. > > > > > > Prototype A would work on ANY background, gradient or not, without any > > > > > further requirements - other than 2 separate images that is. > > > > > > Prototype B does not require any other images, but you must define the > > > > > background. So, if the background was a gradient, you'd have to define > > > > > the same background image for the rating control in order for it to > > > > > match the background it sits on (ie.: the page background). > > > > > > What sways me toward prototype B is that it allows for future > > > > > development. Stars can be easily split into sections, different images > > > > > used, star domensions can be re-defined. > > > > > > Prototype A is easier to use (you don't need to think about the > > > > > background it will sit on), but it puts serious constraints on future > > > > > development and customization. > > > > > > On Mar 15, 6:42 pm, timothytoe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > Would prototype A work on a gradient background? If so, that would > > > > > > be > > > > > > useful. If not, B makes more sense to me. > > > > > > > On Mar 15, 10:11 am, "Diego A." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > To anyone else who might be interested, feel free to send your > > > > > > > feedback. I'm going to go ahead with prototype B for now so the > > > > > > > plugin > > > > > > > will require a background colour. > > > > > > > > On Mar 13, 8:45 pm, "Diego A." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Two things..... > > > > > > > > > 1. v2 now available > > > > > > > > here:http://www.fyneworks.com/jquery/star-rating/ > > > > > > > > - NEW: option to disable the cancel button, > > > > > > > > - NEW: option to make the plugin readOnly > > > > > > > > - NEW: ability to accept any value (anything at all) > > > > > > > > > 2. half-star prototypes now available > > > > > > > > There are 2 ways of doing it, I need your feedback. > > > > > > > > > Prototype A: Using 2 new half-star images (star-left and > > > > > > > > star-right)http://www.fyneworks.com/jquery/star-rating/half-star-A/ > > > > > > > > PROS: works on any background > > > > > > > > CONS: needs extra images > > > > > > > > > Prototype B: Uses CSS to slide part of the star out of view (no > > > > > > > > extra > > > > > > > > images)http://www.fyneworks.com/jquery/star-rating/half-star-B/ > > > > > > > > PROS: can be easily divided into smaller pieces with CSS > > > > > > > > CONS: needs background colour > > > > > > > > > So, which one should we use?
