Federico Bruni <f...@inventati.org> writes: > Il giorno dom 19 lug 2015 alle 14:31, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> ha > scritto: >> Federico Bruni <f...@inventati.org> writes: >> >>> Il giorno dom 19 lug 2015 alle 14:02, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> ha >>> scritto: >>>> I was talking about "use CSS3 features as long as the behavior when >>>> those are not supported still makes sense". >>> >>> it wouldn't make sense >>> I guess that you would see just the first image of the slider, there >>> would be no transition to the next image >> >> So with "slider" you don't mean some user control but rather an >> automated change of images? Wouldn't an animated GIF or MNG file >> provide that? > > Yes, images that slide one after another, as in the example I linked > before. > > I read that MNG is not supported by IE, Opera and Safari. > Perhaps animated GIF could be a way to achieve something similar. Find > attached an example, generated with: > > convert -delay 400 -page 800x360 -loop 0 *.png slider.gif > > on some examples I had previously resized to maximum 800 px width. > > We found the Nineties solution :-) > > James, if you do the texinfo stuff I can create the GIF file of all > the examples required.
Tell you what: I'm probably the Nineties user. That GIF annoys me because it does not allow me to look at stuff as long as I need. I'd probably have a similar problem with a "Slider" (which presumably adds animation to the image flipping). A slow conveyor-belt like appearance would likely annoy me less (basically having _only_ animation) but it still does not beat a statical page for me where _I_ am doing the scrolling and determining the flow of presentation. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
