By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
455,378 Members | 1,435 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 455,378 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

How can i fix this issue?

P: n/a
Some people who visit this website cannot see the rotating pics of the
house while others can. Why is it? Anyone know? Thanks.

http://www.myhousephoto.com/11727/index.html
Jul 20 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
10 Replies


P: n/a
Quoth the raven named in****************@yahoo.com:
Some people who visit this website cannot see the rotating pics of
the house while others can. Why is it? Anyone know? Thanks.

http://www.myhousephoto.com/11727/index.html


<applet ID="RotatingPicture1" NAME="RotatingPicture1"
CODE="RotatingPicture.class" CODEBASE="../" HEIGHT=366 WIDTH=550
ALT="Rotating Picture"> ...

This is an IE only thingy. And then only for visitors who permit
ActiveX controls. Many do not, due to the possible security breaches
from malicious sites.

Others with different browsers won't see it at all.

<meta NAME="Generator" CONTENT="Microsoft FrontPage 5.0">

Ah. That explains it. FrontPage generates many things that do not work
on the WWW. Consider some other technology, such as thumbnails and
then the visitor has the choice to only view images s/he wants to see,
rather than download them all.

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.
Jul 20 '05 #2

P: n/a
Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
Quoth the raven named in****************@yahoo.com:
Some people who visit this website cannot see the rotating pics of
the house while others can. Why is it? Anyone know? Thanks.

http://www.myhousephoto.com/11727/index.html


<applet ID="RotatingPicture1" NAME="RotatingPicture1"
CODE="RotatingPicture.class" CODEBASE="../" HEIGHT=366 WIDTH=550
ALT="Rotating Picture"> ...

This is an IE only thingy. And then only for visitors who permit ActiveX
controls. Many do not, due to the possible security breaches from
malicious sites.


Actually it is a standard HTML 3.2 tag to include a Java Applet.
Although it is deprecated in HTML 4 it is still widely used and
supported. Therefore here we have Java availability requirement not
ActiveX permissions. The page including the Java Applet is displayed
just fine in both my Mozilla and IE browsers.

Probably some visitors with IE and WinXP which doesn't include the
JVM (Virtual Machine for Java) wouldn't see it. Notice that WinXP
SP1 installs the MS JVM while the SP1a doesn't, on a WinXP system.
Users could get the Sun's JRE (Java Run-time Environment) which
includes the browser plug-in from the www.java.com site.

The OP could include info on getting the Java plug-in as alternative
content of your APPLET element:

<APPLET ... >
<PARAM ... >
Your browser doesn't support Java Applets, have them disabled or
is misconfigured.
<a href="http://www.java.com/">Get Java</a>
</APPLET>

The OP might consider using the OBJECT tag
<http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/objects.html#include-objects>
instead APPLET, too.

--
Stanimir
Jul 20 '05 #3

P: n/a
Quoth the raven named Stanimir Stamenkov:
Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
Quoth the raven named in****************@yahoo.com:
Some people who visit this website cannot see the rotating pics
of the house while others can. Why is it? Anyone know? Thanks.

http://www.myhousephoto.com/11727/index.html
<applet ID="RotatingPicture1" NAME="RotatingPicture1"
CODE="RotatingPicture.class" CODEBASE="../" HEIGHT=366 WIDTH=550
ALT="Rotating Picture"> ...

This is an IE only thingy. And then only for visitors who permit
ActiveX controls. Many do not, due to the possible security
breaches from malicious sites.


Actually it is a standard HTML 3.2 tag to include a Java Applet.
Although it is deprecated in HTML 4 it is still widely used and
supported. Therefore here we have Java availability requirement not
ActiveX permissions. The page including the Java Applet is
displayed just fine in both my Mozilla and IE browsers.


Hmm, ok. <g> I have IE set to prompt for ActiveX, and it did and I
said no. Didn't realize that could also represent Java.
Probably some visitors with IE and WinXP which doesn't include the
JVM (Virtual Machine for Java) wouldn't see it. Notice that WinXP
SP1 installs the MS JVM while the SP1a doesn't, on a WinXP system.
Users could get the Sun's JRE (Java Run-time Environment) which
includes the browser plug-in from the www.java.com site.


I'm using Win2K, but have Java turned off...

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.
Jul 20 '05 #4

P: n/a
in****************@yahoo.com wrote:
Some people who visit this website cannot see the rotating pics of the
house while others can. Why is it? Anyone know? Thanks.

http://www.myhousephoto.com/11727/index.html


Notice that you can achieve the same effect using an animated gift
instead of a Java applet. Then, you'll have no problems with any
browser.

Best regards,

Jose Carlos Santos

Jul 20 '05 #5

P: n/a
Josť Carlos Santos wrote:
in****************@yahoo.com wrote:
Some people who visit this website cannot see the rotating pics of the
house while others can. Why is it? Anyone know? Thanks.

http://www.myhousephoto.com/11727/index.html


Notice that you can achieve the same effect using an animated gift
instead of a Java applet. Then, you'll have no problems with any
browser.


In terms of accessibility one could think of better method instead
using large animated GIF - a tiny JavaScript which cycles the
images, loading and replacing the current in the document one at a
time, would be more sane solution, IMO. The image itself could be
placed in a hyper link which points to a page containig all the
images in cases where a UA doesn't have JavaScript support or has it
turned off.

--
Stanimir
Jul 20 '05 #6

P: n/a
Stanimir Stamenkov <s7****@netscape.net> wrote in message news:<bt************@ID-207379.news.uni-berlin.de>...
In terms of accessibility one could think of better method instead
using large animated GIF - a tiny JavaScript which cycles the
images, loading and replacing the current in the document one at a
time, would be more sane solution, IMO. The image itself could be
placed in a hyper link which points to a page containig all the
images in cases where a UA doesn't have JavaScript support or has it
turned off.


Do you happen to know some web page which uses this approach?

Best regards,

Jose Carlos Santos
Jul 20 '05 #7

P: n/a
I'd like to suggest to you that "How can I fix this issue?" is a poor
subject for a newsgroup posting. Assuming that it would benefit you to have
a large number of people take the time to open your message, using a subject
that sums up the nature of your problem would be wise. Simply stating that
you *have* a problem doesn't distinguish your message from a thousand others
that are posted here, and makes it much less likely that any given person
will take the time to open it and read it.

Jul 20 '05 #8

P: n/a
Jose Carlos Santos wrote:
Stanimir Stamenkov <s7****@netscape.net> wrote in message news:<bt************@ID-207379.news.uni-berlin.de>...
In terms of accessibility one could think of better method instead
using large animated GIF - a tiny JavaScript which cycles the
images, loading and replacing the current in the document one at a
time, would be more sane solution, IMO. The image itself could be
placed in a hyper link which points to a page containig all the
images in cases where a UA doesn't have JavaScript support or has it
turned off.


Do you happen to know some web page which uses this approach?


Here's a very draft example:

http://www.geocities.com/stanio/temp...e_for_you.html

I'm not JavaScript expert and I don't have time to experiment more
with this one. Notice that if JavaScript is active I remove the
'href' attribute from the A (link) element so it doesn't act as a
link anymore (if JavaScript is active), but one could make it other
way depending on what the final result should be.

One could make the linked page to contain only thumbnail links with
descriptions, one could enhance the javascript to change the 'href'
of the link in the main document to change with the images, etc.
Using this approach you're not restricted to use 256 color palleted
images only but TrueColor PNGs and JPEGs also.

--
Stanimir
Jul 20 '05 #9

P: n/a
On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 09:34:39 -0500, Harlan Messinger wrote:
I'd like to suggest to you that "How can I fix this issue?" is a poor
subject for a newsgroup posting.


+5 Insightful

--

..

Jul 20 '05 #10

P: n/a
Stanimir Stamenkov <s7****@netscape.net> wrote in message news:<bt************@ID-207379.news.uni-berlin.de>...
Do you happen to know some web page which uses this approach?


Here's a very draft example:

http://www.geocities.com/stanio/temp...e_for_you.html

I'm not JavaScript expert and I don't have time to experiment more
with this one. Notice that if JavaScript is active I remove the
'href' attribute from the A (link) element so it doesn't act as a
link anymore (if JavaScript is active), but one could make it other
way depending on what the final result should be.


Thanks a lot.

Jose Carlos Santos
Jul 20 '05 #11

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.