Posted by Dr Clue on 09/21/05 22:53

osman wrote:
> Dr Clue wrote
>
>>so I thought I'd re-visit the question.
>
>
> Thanks for having another go at it.
> Interesting method.
> You're suggesting having all the images load on the page and making the
> links to them as anchors.
> So the anchors take you to the pictures 'down' the page.
> I really need to keep it all inside the 600px high design.

Well , if done well , the person viewing the page would have an
itentical user experiance either way, so I'm not sure what the objection is

> Maybe having the images stacked on top of each other will work.
> Though I can't see how this will change the z-index, width/height or
> any other style attribute of the images.

I piddled with that thought too, and the nearest it would resolve in
my mind was an ugly piece of soup where the 500x500 display iframe
was replaced with divs/spans that were actually inside each of the links
and a variation on the css rule you are using did the trick trading out
the span portion of the rule for an id and having two spans
to talk to and two rules ending in id's instead of elements
As that thought went on , z-indexing indeed came into the proces, as I
pondered how I would actually click on these huge <a></a> constructs.

> I'm working on it.
> http://cssplay.co.uk/menu/gallery4.html#nogo has some great examples,
> but none that work 100% for me.
>
> This is so easy with flash, but I'm determined to do it in xhtml.
> Haven't looked at xframes or xml. Is that an easy option?
>

I like flash about as much as I like microsoft, I'd much rather do
it in VEML. :)


--
--.
--=<> Dr. Clue (A.K.A. Ian A. Storms) <>=-- C++,HTML, CSS,Javascript
--=<> http://resume.drclue.net <>=-- AJAX, SOAP, XML, HTTP
--=<> http://www.drclue.net <>=-- SERVLETS,TCP/IP, SQL
--.

[Back to original message]