Blog Documentation Book a Demo
Vanilla 1 is no longer supported or maintained. If you need a copy, you can get it here.
HackerOne users: Testing against this community violates our program's Terms of Service and will result in your bounty being denied.

Custom ajax fonts

tripdragontripdragon
edited October 2005 in Vanilla 1.0 Help
An idea I always had, and now ajax could do it. Just like a bold tag we could have a window that could open up and list a number of nice fonts that could be used and then when the file saves it could could save the fonts as an image instead of the text, just makeing it basic white and black would be a small file size.. and could give a neater reading experience at the basic text size. Cause of course it cant scale yet till we get jpeg 2000
«13

Comments

  • KosmoKosmo
    That is satan you are talking about. Besides, why can't you make a set of letters of your liking and use them like you'd use smilies?
  • tripdragontripdragon
    this would be faster and dynamic.
  • KosmoKosmo
    faster and dynamic satan, that's what it is.
  • the alohathe aloha
    that would be the efforts of mankind devoted towards a minor improvement that most people simply do not care about; also known as satan's bidding. leave me, satan.
  • KrakKrak New
    Im confused. You want to be able to change the font you post with? And have it converted to an image? Why?
  • lechlech ✭
    You do realize that after 50 long-winded posts, the server would be jam packed with these "images as messages" and you couldn't search for anything, right?
  • the alohathe aloha
    on top of that, i forgot to mention that i know of both php and flash being able to do this devil's work.
  • lechlech ✭
    ewww, flash. This idea would be wrong on so many levels. You do know that if you want to resize your text, all you have to do is hold ctrl + scroll the mousewheel, right? otherwise you could always set up your own custom stylesheet to over-ride other font settings you don't like :P
  • KosmoKosmo
    Well, there are several clever typeface changing techniques that still allow the text being accessible and searchable, one of those techniques can be seen in use at Shaun Inman and I think it uses JS for that, but the Flash text replacement technique is also very popular when using headers, but it is not suitable for regular text. But I wouldn't risk it to render a whole pages worth of text on a forum, I'm presuming that no one would like to wait for a good couple of minutes for the script to render a whole page just because some jackass wanted to have some crappy font on his boards.
  • tripdragontripdragon
    it could be limited to a number of letters or words
  • KosmoKosmo
    edited October 2005
    It could be used in user names, topics and button texts but I would keep it away from the regular text, since the easier it is to read the better it is for the whole community.
  • timberfordtimberford
    the flash embedded font technique (sIFR) created by inman is very clever and used sparingly really can enhance a design. the text looks and can be selected like normal text and if you don't have flash it degrades nicely back to your css based font-family selector. this ajax thing sounds a bit over the top though.
  • KosmoKosmo
    Especially when the AJAX solution would be extremely close to the JS solution, how much more scripting and bling flash you'd need for it to be suitable for your needs?
  • the alohathe aloha
    flash, as it is at this point, is inherently inaccessible. i know all it takes is an easy download, but why force anyone to do anything to look at your content? just because you went to art school, or because you bought or pirated the program is not enough of a reason. i am starting to take a sick joy in people proclaiming how easy it is to do something in new language of the month and then still haveing to ask how to do it by way of requesting the extension instead of coding it themselves.
  • FLCFLC New
    i am starting to take a sick joy in people proclaiming how ajax could now do what they wanted, even though XMLHttpRequest has been around for as long as I care to remember (at least IE 4 days)
  • KrakKrak New
    What do you have against flash. Really. I dont know of anyone, except maybe a few of you, that dont have it. Its a 2 second download. I'd say 99% of internet users have it. Flash is awesome. I dont like pages that go overboard with it, but I have used it in the past. Made an awesome header with smoke, made a cool computer chip with electric pulses. I mean really. C'mon.
  • lechlech ✭
    Krak, it's not that it's a 2 second download, it's more like taking the mountainous high-road vs's the easy and joyeous straight path. There are seriously better ways to accomodate this without the need for extensive images or embeded flash with degredation etc. I'm sure others who've come across slap and run software like mentioned will probably agree with me that it's a total pain in the ass and a massive mangement nightmare when done wrong. You're seriously trading 2.5kb of text stored into a db, and proposing to slap it into a 5kb image or an adding an additional 5-10kb flash movie to re-render what is already plain textual data. This might be useful for maybe rerendering the RSS feed or some random one-shot function, but not for a series of elements on a message board. And flash tends to run like shit on anything outside of windows half the time, so this would honestly not be much of a benefit. Sorry, I just think this is the stupidest idea conceived so far and would rather vote for banner sized signatures with oodles of obnoxious font tags. </sarcasm>
  • MinisweeperMinisweeper New
    /me peeks through a gap in the door, shuts it quietly and strolls on by pretending he was never here
  • the alohathe aloha
    i have it installed, but i don't work with it. stuff done in flash always looks like it is done in flash. that is fine and all, but it has become so boring even as a viewer. not all content should be "clean" and "high-tech". almost every flash site i see goes overboard with being flashy. i resent waiting for a simple site to load only because someone wanted to do it in flash. the lack of taste, i feel, is a matter of the tool being too powerful for most producers' good. plus, as lech points out, flash plays best with windows. the 1% are just as important as the 99%. some people do not want to use flash, and that is their perogative. some people still have old computers that can't run flash; they should be able to have as rich of an experience as possible. then add that there are no other accessability functions within flash for the handicapped and flash is very inaccessable. as a producer, i want to be able to legitimately use the tools i use without anyone else caring or ever wanting a cut.
  • KrakKrak New
    edited October 2005
    No no, I think you got me wrong. Im against this idea (the ajax, image text thing). I was just wondering why so many people (on this forum it seems) seem to be against flash. lol I wasnt argueing for the imagifying(?) of text. I dont like sites that use flash for like, everything and what not. But for groovy images, headers and so forth, it kicks ass. Just because a few sites go overboard with it, or make crappy flash code doesnt mean the teh entire intarweb should just scrap it.
This discussion has been closed.