By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
459,934 Members | 1,538 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 459,934 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

FAQ Topic - Why are my rollovers so slow?

P: n/a
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FAQ Topic - Why are my rollovers so slow?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Images are cached by the browser depending on the headers sent by
the server. If the server does not send sufficient information
for the browser to decide the image is cacheable, the browser
will check if the image has been updated every time you change the
src of an image (in some user settings). To overcome this you
must send suitable headers.

http://www.mnot.net/cache_docs/
--
Postings such as this are automatically sent once a day. Their
goal is to answer repeated questions, and to offer the content to
the community for continuous evaluation/improvement. The complete
comp.lang.javascript FAQ is at http://jibbering.com/faq/index.html.
The FAQ workers are a group of volunteers. The sendings of these
daily posts are proficiently hosted by http://www.pair.com.

Nov 8 '07 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
7 Replies


P: n/a
On Nov 7, 4:00 pm, "FAQ server" <javascr...@dotinternet.bewrote:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FAQ Topic - Why are my rollovers so slow?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Images are cached by the browser depending on the headers sent by
the server. If the server does not send sufficient information
for the browser to decide the image is cacheable, the browser
will check if the image has been updated every time you change the
src of an image (in some user settings). To overcome this you
must send suitable headers.

http://www.mnot.net/cache_docs/
Perhaps CSS sprites should be mentioned? If a browser supports CSS
they are a faster solution.

Peter

Nov 8 '07 #2

P: n/a
On Nov 9, 12:38 pm, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedE...@web.de>
wrote:
Peter Michaux wrote:
Perhaps CSS sprites should be mentioned? If a browser supports CSS
they are a faster solution.

-v please
"-v" ?

Peter

Nov 9 '07 #3

P: n/a
Peter Michaux a écrit :
On Nov 9, 12:38 pm, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedE...@web.de>
wrote:
>Peter Michaux wrote:
>>Perhaps CSS sprites should be mentioned? If a browser supports CSS
they are a faster solution.
-v please

"-v" ?
Rhaa, I love this newsgroup it is always the some jokes over and over
and over. Makes me smile everytime :)

Anyway, to stop (I hope) this "-v" joke everybody is making, let me try
an explanation.

When Thomas is writing "-v please" he is simply asking someone to be
more "verbose", he wants more explanations. Looks like Thomas is
assuming everyone is using command lines tools where the "-v" parameter
is quite common, that's as simple as that.

--
laurent
Nov 10 '07 #4

P: n/a
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said the following on 11/10/2007 5:48 AM:
Peter Michaux wrote:
>On Nov 9, 12:38 pm, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedE...@web.de>
wrote:
>>Peter Michaux wrote:
Perhaps CSS sprites should be mentioned? If a browser supports CSS
they are a faster solution.
-v please
"-v" ?

That means "Be more verbose, elaborate on that."
And just think, had you said that to start with none of this would have
happened.
To my experience, hacker jargon is quite common in Usenet.
So is profanity.
I suggest you learn the basics, starting with http://www.catb.org/jargon/
Do you also suggest people learn the basics of profanity since it is
"quite common in Usenet"?

--
Randy
Chance Favors The Prepared Mind
comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq/index.html
Javascript Best Practices - http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/
Nov 10 '07 #5

P: n/a
Randy Webb wrote:
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said the following on 11/10/2007 5:48 AM:
>To my experience, hacker jargon is quite common in Usenet.

So is profanity.
>I suggest you learn the basics, starting with http://www.catb.org/jargon/

Do you also suggest people learn the basics of profanity since it is
"quite common in Usenet"?
I grant you this: Your postings and your argumentation are exceptionally
well suited for learning about logic and proper argumentation. Because
somehow you manage it to demonstrate at least one logical fallacy in your
argumentation. This time they were /dicto simpliciter ad dictum secundum
quid/ (Fallacy of Accident) and /plurium interrogationum/ (Fallacy of a
Loaded Question).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy
PointedEars
--
Prototype.js was written by people who don't know javascript for people
who don't know javascript. People who don't know javascript are not
the best source of advice on designing systems that use javascript.
-- Richard Cornford, cljs, <f8*******************@news.demon.co.uk>
Nov 10 '07 #6

P: n/a
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
Peter Michaux wrote:
>On Nov 9, 12:38 pm, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>Peter Michaux wrote:
Perhaps CSS sprites should be mentioned? If a browser
supports CSS they are a faster solution.
-v please

"-v" ?

That means "Be more verbose, elaborate on that."

To my experience, hacker jargon is quite common in Usenet.
I suggest you learn the basics, starting with
http://www.catb.org/jargon/
I suggest you abandon any attempt to get everyone else to learn a set of
esoteric abbreviations and instead attempt to be more verbose in your
requests.

Richard.

Nov 10 '07 #7

P: n/a
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said the following on 11/10/2007 11:43 AM:
Randy Webb wrote:
>Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said the following on 11/10/2007 5:48 AM:
>>To my experience, hacker jargon is quite common in Usenet.
So is profanity.
>>I suggest you learn the basics, starting with http://www.catb.org/jargon/
Do you also suggest people learn the basics of profanity since it is
"quite common in Usenet"?

I grant you this:
Don't "grant" me anything, simply answer a yes/no question. One
suggestion is just as ludicrous as the other. The English language is so
ambiguous that it is easier on everybody if you simply state what you
want to know as concisely as possible and it removes most of the chance
of it being misunderstood and it also prevents noise threads such as
this one.

--
Randy
Chance Favors The Prepared Mind
comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq/index.html
Javascript Best Practices - http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/
Nov 11 '07 #8

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.