What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Best Buy finds gold in Iowa. view!
youtube.com/bestbuy0 - Best Buy employee, Danielle Kelly, sings her way into holiday campaign.
79 Comments
- tempusrob, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8... Or you could click the link and read a paragraph or two.
- graywave, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7A good point skamp. For instance (taken from the site), "Lightbox JS is a simple, unobtrusive script used to overlay images on the current page." That should fit.
- chris9902, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5since it uses the "rel" tag if javascript is disabled it will ignore it and do nothing, it will just open the image as normal in a new or same window.
- dimatt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5nice, i always thought that this was a pretty slick effect
- UGM2099, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I love this.
And I love Lokesh, I tried to give him a donation a couple months ago and he refused! Seems like a great guy and he makes great things. - Kitsune818, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I'm amused this is being tagged as AJAX on del.icio.us
- tempusrob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Should be perfectly accessible. The links simply normal links to image files, but with a rel="lightbox" attribute added. Users without JavaScript would simply navigate to the image. Users with JavaScript get the full show. :D
- tempusrob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Well, he's got a donation link at the bottom of the LB2.0 page. So now's your chance. ;)
- rhino_rampant, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Agreed, I liked the 1.0's static popup...none of the growing and shrinking...
Maybe I'll the multiple images aspect only with the version I'm currently using. - NoMoreNicksLeft, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Like the idea, if not the current implementation. Why mess with perfection?
Not only using this script on my own site, but trying to make all my popup wizards do something like this (why use it just for images?)... - munkt0n, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3a wee bit buggy, the horizontal rules are sometimes showing up on the caption bar.
- icexe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3the demos seem kind of slow to me, but i'm assuming that can be adjusted. very nice nonetheless.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I think i prefer Lightbox 1.0 w/o the effects. These effects are very taxing for 1-2ghz machines which are still heavily used in our offices.
Lightbox had it right the first time where you clicked and you were instantly greated with the loading of the image. In this version, the user gets a feeling of "having to wait" because of the resize animation, which is unecessary for most uses.
I did think the preload feature was quite useful, and on sites like gamespot.com where you traverse through several images, they should be preloaded as soon as the content finishes loading to improve responsiveness.
I think I'll stick with MOO.fx for my content transitions & lightbox1.0 for quick image displays. - mbowers007, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I love the Lightbox v2, but I had a problem using it on IE6 and IE7b2. Using the downloaded code, on IE6 the overlay didn%u2019t cover the full width of the page, nor did it extend beyond the bottom of the viewport (a requirement I had since my photos were further down on the page). In IE7b2 I didn%u2019t have the width issue, just the viewport issue. There were no FF problems, of course. I added the below function to lightbox.js [the function is called immediately after %u201Cnew Effect.Appear(%u2026), which is line 296.%u201D]. P.S. %u2013 This may not be the preferred or optimal way to go about it, but I%u2019m no javascript guru.
function fixIE() {
var ie = 0;
var agt = navigator.userAgent.toLowerCase();
if (agt.indexOf("msie 6") != -1) { ie = 1; }
if (agt.indexOf("msie 7") != -1) { ie = 1; }
if (ie) {
var overlay = document.getElementById('overlay');
var pageWidth = document.body.parentNode.scrollWidth;
var pageHeight = document.body.parentNode.scrollHeight;
var viewportHeight = document.body.clientHeight;
if (pageHeight > viewportHeight) {
overlay.style['height'] = pageHeight "px";
}
overlay.style['width'] = pageWidth "px";
}
} - toekneebullard, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3You know, I didn't think of it that way, but now that I am, it just makes it that much cooler.
- fatlip, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3this is sick! if i could digg it twice i would.. i cant wait til they update the firefox extension that uses lightbox for image viewing
- tempusrob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Sure, Prototype has support for AJAX but there's nothing that Lightbox does that is AJAX. It uses prototype for other functions. All Lightbox does is parse the anchor elements in the document.
- xeeton, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Well, it is. Plus, it is using the Prototype Framework for server calls, and Script.aculo.us for effects. These are very typical of AJAX apps/sites.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This article: http://www.mondaybynoon.com/2006/03/27/suckerfish-hoverlightbox/
Is specifically about making lightbox/hoverlightbox accessible by screen readers and text browsers. - UGM2099, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2oh, now he has a paypal donate button on his site :)
good, I can hit him up. - firefusion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2For a second I thought this was the Firefox greasemonkey lightbox. Silly me.
- rrbaker, on 01/15/2009, -0/+2Lightbox is definitely 2.0's solution to the long-dead popup box. Thanks for the heads up that this has been released.
- Allometry, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Quality!
This guy's script is pretty solid. - jmuchrisf, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5I think accessibility is one major drawback of these web2.0 type applications. I know one of my cardinal rules while following section 508 guidelines is to prety much avoid javascript since screen readers "pretty much ignore javascript". but, I also think a lot of that problem relies on screen reader technology. It's a shame we as web application developers have to hinder ourselves since that technology isn't keeping up
this is my no means a "forget handicapped people" post. Simply a comment on technology. google just updated their lynx based scrapers to a mozilla based scraper for this exact reason. - kickarse, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Finally! took forever for 2.0 to come out
- GuineaPig, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It doesn't work in Opera 9.*, however.
- graywave, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Not entirely certain I like some of the new effects but this is an excellent step. I'll have to experiment a little.
All hail Lightbox! - jmuchrisf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Wow. That is AWESOME. Very sexy effect. I could definitely use that building it into a image gallery site.
- GuineaPig, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It's not that screen-reader technology is not keeping up; technology is being stretched in ways that it shouldn't be.
While I think AJAX is cool, that developers have to use such a kludgy technology to build RIA is a testament to the dysfunctionality of the software industry. - iliketurtles2, on 11/20/2008, -0/+2Wordpress plugin: http://zeo.unic.net.my/
- heathenx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2absolutely brilliant!
- creole, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Looks very nice although I'd also wonder about the ease of changing the animation and transitions. Instead of animating the x and y seperately to adjust the window for the new image, why not both at the same time?
- digiteyes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This is one App i dont mind shelling some bugs for. The author of the script has done a fantastic job IMO
- 32bitwonder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Great work Lokesh!
Now if only there was a way of integrating the Wordpress Lightbox plugin with WP-FLV and other non image elements like whats been done with Lightbox Gone Wild. - Onibus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Very nice script indeed. So long for those ugly popup windows.
- weiran, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Very slick, but still no compatibility with Opera :(.
- jarrodtrainque, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I like the effects, and the script is pretty tight.
I'm more curious about the benefits of the emerging approaches/methods of sharing photos online. Many of us (myself included) jumped on the flickr wagon, and I'm wondering what the benefits of hosting your own photos (using a tool like Lightbox) vs. outsourcing your photo hosting needs to a site like flickr. (Yup, this may be slightly off-topic.) - compgeek275, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yeah, I like the effect, but it doesn't seem very practical. I use the original for my page, and it seems that not going back to the page and including the resizing pictures would be distracting, but if you like it, go for it!
- NickyBatts, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It is a very nice script, but I almost regret upgrading... the new version adds a lot of load time to my page...
Check out the load times on my relatively sparse page:
http://www.nicholasbattaglia.com/
I think the script adds at least 3 seconds... - Kailash.Nadh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Slick. Nice work Lokesh.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Liquidrums: I agree. the new effects look nice but 1.0 was quicker.
- DarkHack, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Excellent, I'll probably will upgrade this onto my blog.
- Loonquawl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I don't think the animations are a good idea (maybe except the background fading out), they slow down browsing, but I like the disappearing prev/next buttons very much.
I'm planning to make my version of the greasemonkey script ( http://shiftingpixel.com/downloads/greasedlightbox.user.js ). If I do it, I'll definitely use buttons like these. - firehydra2k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Very hot, works with IE, Firefox, Opera (no opacity, though)...can't wait to see if it works on Safari, Konqueror, etc....
- SiLeNtHuNtER, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1here goes the tip for integrating lightbox with blogger. http://www.benh.org/techblog/2006/12/lightbox-js-v20-integration-with.html
- flavius731, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2somebody buy that guy a lap dance
- bpartridge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Does anybody have an idea why the overlay doesn't support dimming flash movies? Or am I just nuts... ?
- Daem0nX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Glad to see another update, and it being dugg - well deserved :)
- rhino_rampant, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Absolutely Fantastic, but I thought that Lightbox was purely CSS Javascript (without any asychronization)
- one111one1one11, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Loving this.
I also donated. -
Show 51 - 79 of 79 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is