Hi All,
I'm having a hard time figuring out the DOM syntax to get one frame
that has thumnails of images to display at full size in another frame
(onmouseover).
I looked at a couple tutorials and have come up with the broken script
below. Please Help.-
------------------------------------------
master_frame.html------------------------------
<html>
<head>
<title>Frames Set, Index with Bannere and Footer</title>
</head>
<frameset rows="64,*,64">
<frame name="top" scrolling="no" noresize src="top.html">
<frameset cols="150,*">
<frame name="index" src="index.html">
<frame name="main" src="main.html">
</frameset>
<frame name="bottom" scrolling="no" noresize src="bottom.html">
</frameset>
</html>
---------------------------------------------
index.html------------------------------------
//contains thumbnails
<html>
<head><titleEvent 1</title>
<script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">
<!-- hide script from old broswers
if (document.images)
{
image1= new Image;
image2= new Image;
image3= new Image;
image1.src="images/large/1.gif";
image2.src="images/large/2.gif";
image3.src="images/large/3.gif";
}
else{
image1="";
image2="";
image3="";
document.placeholder="";
}
//-->
</script>
</head>
<body>
<h2Event 1</h2>
<div class="content">
<img src="images/placeholder.gif" name="placeholder">
<a href="#"
onMouseover="parent.main.getElementByID('overimage ').src=image3.src"
onMouseout="document.placeholder.src=image3.src">< img src="images/
thumb/1t.gif"></a>
</body>
</html>
----------------------------------------
main.html-----------------------------------
//large image display
<html>
<body>
<img id="overimage">
</body>
</html> 7 2975
I've worked in the program and I was able to get it to change the
image in the next frame:
1. First probem is I can't seem to figure out how to get x to be a
different url when the user mouse over the thumb nail:
2. is there a way that I can only update the image and not dynamicly
create the whole page? the larger image stacks in the context
frame.
html>
<head>
<title>
</title>
<script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">
if (document.images)
{
image1= new Image;
image2= new Image;
image3= new Image;
image1.src="images/large/1.gif";
image2.src="images/large/2.gif";
image3.src="images/large/3.gif";
var x=image1.src="images/large/1.gif";
}
else{
image1="";
image2="";
image3="";
document.placeholder="";
}
function writeContent(thispage)
{
//parent.content.document.write("<html<head<\/head<body
bgcolor='green'><h1>")
parent.content.document.write("You are now <br>looking at
page"+thispage+"<img src="+x+" name='placeholder'>")
//parent.content.document.write("<\/h1><\/body><\/html>")
}
</script>
</head>
<body>
nav<br>
<img src="1t.gif" onMouseover="javascript:writeContent(1)">
</body>
</html>
Leoa a écrit :
Hi All,
I'm having a hard time figuring out the DOM syntax to get one frame
that has thumnails of images to display at full size in another frame
(onmouseover).
I looked at a couple tutorials and have come up with the broken script
below. Please Help.-
------------------------------------------
master_frame.html------------------------------
<html>
<head>
<title>Frames Set, Index with Bannere and Footer</title>
</head>
<frameset rows="64,*,64">
<frame name="top" scrolling="no" noresize src="top.html">
<frameset cols="150,*">
<frame name="index" src="index.html">
<frame name="main" src="main.html">
</frameset>
<frame name="bottom" scrolling="no" noresize src="bottom.html">
</frameset>
</html>
---------------------------------------------
index.html------------------------------------
//contains thumbnails
<html>
<head><titleEvent 1</title>
for instance place here this code :
<base target="main">
<script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">
<!-- hide script from old broswers
if (document.images)
{
image1= new Image;
image2= new Image;
image3= new Image;
image1.src="images/large/1.gif";
image2.src="images/large/2.gif";
image3.src="images/large/3.gif";
}
else{
image1="";
image2="";
image3="";
document.placeholder="";
}
//-->
</script>
</head>
<body>
<h2Event 1</h2>
<div class="content">
<img src="images/placeholder.gif" name="placeholder">
<a href="#"
onMouseover="parent.main.getElementByID('overimage ').src=image3.src"
onMouseout="document.placeholder.src=image3.src">< img src="images/
thumb/1t.gif"></a>
parent.main.document !!!!
^^^^^^^^^
<a href="images/large/3.gif"
onmouseover="parent.main.document.getElementByID(' overimage').src=image3.src"
onmouseout="document.placeholder.src=image3.src"
onclick="return false;"><img src="images/thumb/1t.gif"></a>
or :
<a href="images/large/3.gif"
onmouseover="parent.main.document.images['overimage'].src=image3.src"
onmouseout="document.placeholder.src=image3.src"
onclick="return false;"><img src="images/thumb/1t.gif"></a>
</body>
</html>
main.html-----------------------------------
//large image display
<html>
<body>
<img id="overimage">
<img id="overimage" name="overimage" src="" alt="Viewer">
</body>
</html>
--
Stephane Moriaux et son (moins) vieux Mac déjà dépassé
Stephane Moriaux and his (less) old Mac already out of date
On Jun 14, 9:47 pm, Leoa <leondria.bar...@gmail.comwrote:
image1= new Image;
Why does this work without parentheses ? I just tried the
following little test and in Fiddler I saw both image
requests being made, and I see "hello" get document.written.
<html><body>
<script>
img1 = new Image;
img1.src="http://example.com/i1.gif";
img2 = new Image();
img2.src="http://example.com/i2.gif";
myarray = new Array;
myarray[2]="hello";
document.write(myarray[2]);
</script>
</body></html>
Why have all the books and JS examples on the web shown
the parentheses all these years if they weren't needed ?
I already switched to using =[]; for new arrays (in case
anyone suggests it).
dd wrote:
On Jun 14, 9:47 pm, Leoa <leondria.bar...@gmail.comwrote:
>image1= new Image;
Why does this work without parentheses ? I just tried the
following little test and in Fiddler I saw both image
requests being made, and I see "hello" get document.written.
You know, I don't really know, but I have always used parentheses when
the end goal required a parameter. For example:
var arr1 = new Array(10); // I know it will contain 10 elements
var arr2 = new Array; // no clue of the length, I just need an array
Maybe you could post this as a new thread and someone else could provide
further feedback?
<html><body>
<script>
img1 = new Image;
img1.src="http://example.com/i1.gif";
img2 = new Image();
img2.src="http://example.com/i2.gif";
myarray = new Array;
myarray[2]="hello";
document.write(myarray[2]);
</script>
</body></html>
Why have all the books and JS examples on the web shown
the parentheses all these years if they weren't needed ?
I already switched to using =[]; for new arrays (in case
anyone suggests it).
That is still, in my opinion, user preference. One theory however is
that it reduces overhead by using a literal instead of the constructors
invoked by "new Object" or "new Array." Actually, theory is probably
wording it incorrectly.
It *does* reduce overhead.
This is the same relative theory about using the unary + operator as
opposed to using Number to type cast.
I cannot remember where I read this, it had to have been the FAQ, or Mr.
Cornford's site, maybe even the JavaScript Toolbox perhaps. Although I
couldn't find it in any of those locations.
--
-Lost
Remove the extra words to reply by e-mail. Don't e-mail me. I am
kidding. No I am not.
Hi lost,
thanks for replying to my message. It was a real headache to figure
out. But I found another ( cheesey way) of doing this.
<html>
<head>
<meta name="robots" content="noindex,nofollow">
<title>
</title>
<script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">
var x;
function myfunction(txt)
{
x=txt;
parent.content.document.getElementById('changeImg' ).innerHTML =
"<img src="+x+" name='placeholder'>";
}
</script>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#f3efcc">
<a href="left5.html" TARGET="_self">page 1</a <a href="page1.html"
TARGET="_self">page 2</a<br><br>
<img src="images/thumb/1t.gif" onMouseover="myfunction('images/large/
1.gif')">
<img src="images/thumb/2t.gif" onMouseover="myfunction('images/large/
2.gif')">
</body>
</html>
Again, Thankyou.
On Jun 18, 11:15 am, -Lost <maventheextrawo...@techie.comwrote:
dd wrote:
On Jun 14, 9:47 pm, Leoa <leondria.bar...@gmail.comwrote:
image1= new Image;
Why does this work without parentheses ? I just tried the
following little test and in Fiddler I saw both image
requests being made, and I see "hello" get document.written.
You know, I don't really know, but I have always used parentheses when
the end goal required a parameter. For example:
var arr1 = new Array(10); // I know it will contain 10 elements
var arr2 = new Array; // no clue of the length, I just need an array
Maybe you could post this as a new thread and someone else could provide
further feedback?
<html><body>
<script>
img1 = new Image;
img1.src="http://example.com/i1.gif";
img2 = new Image();
img2.src="http://example.com/i2.gif";
myarray = new Array;
myarray[2]="hello";
document.write(myarray[2]);
</script>
</body></html>
Why have all the books and JS examples on the web shown
the parentheses all these years if they weren't needed ?
I already switched to using =[]; for new arrays (in case
anyone suggests it).
That is still, in my opinion, user preference. One theory however is
that it reduces overhead by using a literal instead of the constructors
invoked by "new Object" or "new Array." Actually, theory is probably
wording it incorrectly.
It *does* reduce overhead.
This is the same relative theory about using the unary + operator as
opposed to using Number to type cast.
I cannot remember where I read this, it had to have been the FAQ, or Mr.
Cornford's site, maybe even the JavaScript Toolbox perhaps. Although I
couldn't find it in any of those locations.
--
-Lost
Remove the extra words to reply by e-mail. Don't e-mail me. I am
kidding. No I am not.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
On Jun 18, 5:15 pm, -Lost <maventheextrawo...@techie.comwrote:
You know, I don't really know, but I have always used parentheses when
the end goal required a parameter. For example:
var arr1 =newArray(10); // I know it will contain 10 elements
var arr2 =newArray; // no clue of the length, I just need an array
Maybe you could post this as anewthread and someone else could provide
further feedback?
I just noticed that at the JavaScript 1.5 reference
site at mozilla, even they don't use new Array; http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs..._Objects:Array
Search for new Array(); and you find it several times.
dd wrote:
On Jun 18, 5:15 pm, -Lost <maventheextrawo...@techie.comwrote:
>You know, I don't really know, but I have always used parentheses when the end goal required a parameter. For example:
var arr1 =newArray(10); // I know it will contain 10 elements var arr2 =newArray; // no clue of the length, I just need an array
Maybe you could post this as anewthread and someone else could provide further feedback?
I just noticed that at the JavaScript 1.5 reference
site at mozilla, even they don't use new Array; http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs..._Objects:Array
Search for new Array(); and you find it several times.
Yep.
Offhand I decided to check the mighty Mr. Crockford's JSLint to see what
it would say, and it actually spit the error:
"Missing '()' invoking a constructor."
....on:
var arr1 = new Array;
Now, again, I see the call operator being necessary only (and obviously)
when you need to pass a parameter. I have witnessed no catastrophic
behavior from this, but nor have I tested it farther than checking the
instanceof arr1.
One thing I do not agree with is:
"Error: Use the array literal notation []."
Granted, we know about the optimization benefits from using literals.
However, to teach "whoever" that it is an error is erroneous in and of
itself.
I guess if you absolutely needed an array of a specific size and don't
know its contents, JSLint would have you do:
var arr1 = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 100; i++)
{
arr1[i] = null; // or '' or *whatever*
}
I think I'll stick to "new Array(100)".
And speaking of which, the documentation and prevention of the increment
and decrement operators boggles me. Is:
for (var i = 0; i < 100; i = i + 1)
....actually supposed to be more efficient than the normal
(aforementioned) method?
--
-Lost
Remove the extra words to reply by e-mail. Don't e-mail me. I am
kidding. No I am not. This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics
by: Charles Crume |
last post by:
Hello;
My "index.htm" page has 3 frames (content, navigation bar, and logo).
I set the "SRC" of the "logo" frame to a blank gif image and then want to
change it's contents after the other two...
|
by: RWD |
last post by:
I am trying to figure out how to change the target frame in my hyperlink on
a DHTML menu. The menu is in one frame and the target frame is called
"main"
The code is below:
Thanks in advance...
|
by: Robert |
last post by:
Hi,
I'm trying to make a slide show, with two frames: on the left frame small
thumbnails, and on the right frame the big sized image. Of course when the
user clicks on a thumbnail in the left...
|
by: Frances Del Rio |
last post by:
if (parent.frames.main.location == 'mediaselect.html') {
I have a very simple frameset, name of frame where I'm checking is
'main'... why is this not working? I mean this is correct syntax,...
|
by: Evan |
last post by:
I have a web page with 2 frames. The left frame is running menu.aspx and the
right frame is running images.aspx. When a selection is made in menu.aspx I
call a method in images.aspx and pass a...
|
by: PieOPah |
last post by:
I have a webpage that uses frames (yes I know, frames - previously been
flamed about that, but I do not know anything else to use since I am
clueless!!! Been asked to cobble together a site since...
|
by: ArrK |
last post by:
I want to use a control frame to create and/or modify the content
(images and text) of a display frame - all files and images are client
side. . When I try to write to the
display frame from the...
|
by: DolphinDB |
last post by:
Tired of spending countless mintues downsampling your data? Look no further!
In this article, you’ll learn how to efficiently downsample 6.48 billion high-frequency records to 61 million...
|
by: isladogs |
last post by:
The next Access Europe meeting will be on Wednesday 6 Mar 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC) and finishing at about 19:15 (7.15PM).
In this month's session, we are pleased to welcome back...
|
by: Vimpel783 |
last post by:
Hello!
Guys, I found this code on the Internet, but I need to modify it a little. It works well, the problem is this: Data is sent from only one cell, in this case B5, but it is necessary that data...
|
by: ArrayDB |
last post by:
The error message I've encountered is; ERROR:root:Error generating model response: exception: access violation writing 0x0000000000005140, which seems to be indicative of an access violation...
|
by: Defcon1945 |
last post by:
I'm trying to learn Python using Pycharm but import shutil doesn't work
|
by: Shællîpôpï 09 |
last post by:
If u are using a keypad phone, how do u turn on JavaScript, to access features like WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram....
|
by: af34tf |
last post by:
Hi Guys, I have a domain whose name is BytesLimited.com, and I want to sell it. Does anyone know about platforms that allow me to list my domain in auction for free. Thank you
|
by: Faith0G |
last post by:
I am starting a new it consulting business and it's been a while since I setup a new website. Is wordpress still the best web based software for hosting a 5 page website? The webpages will be...
|
by: isladogs |
last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 3 Apr 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM).
In this session, we are pleased to welcome former...
| |