http://www.maratz.com/blog/archives/2005/05/02/image-preloader/ Hypertext rulez™ Wed, 23 Mar 2011 22:34:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://www.maratz.com/blog/archives/2005/05/02/image-preloader/#comment-543 wolframlinke Tue, 10 May 2005 15:13:08 +0000 http://www.maratz.com/blog/archives/2005/05/02/image-preloader/#comment-543 cool little idea. it'll fix a lot of missunderstandings in discussions with clients concerning loading speeds. It allways bother me, as this discussion is nowadays absolutely useless, but it seems to struck the clients mind. Thanks for this tool. Wolfram. cool little idea. it’ll fix a lot of missunderstandings in discussions with clients concerning loading speeds. It allways bother me, as this discussion is nowadays absolutely useless, but it seems to struck the clients mind. Thanks for this tool. Wolfram.

]]> http://www.maratz.com/blog/archives/2005/05/02/image-preloader/#comment-517 dusoft Tue, 03 May 2005 22:37:31 +0000 http://www.maratz.com/blog/archives/2005/05/02/image-preloader/#comment-517 Yeah, I know a this ... good solution anyway. Yeah, I know a this … good solution anyway.

]]> http://www.maratz.com/blog/archives/2005/05/02/image-preloader/#comment-515 Jonathan Snook Tue, 03 May 2005 01:54:45 +0000 http://www.maratz.com/blog/archives/2005/05/02/image-preloader/#comment-515 What's fascinating is that <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-DOM-Level-1-19981001/level-one-html.html#ID-91256910">DOM Level 1 seems to include lowSrc</a> as a valid property of an image object but you're right in that I can find no mention of the lowsrc property in the spec. Also, <a href="http://www.blooberry.com/indexdot/html/tagpages/i/image.htm">Blooberry</a> indicates that very few browsers actually support the non-spec. So, just ignore my suggestion. :D What’s fascinating is that DOM Level 1 seems to include lowSrc as a valid property of an image object but you’re right in that I can find no mention of the lowsrc property in the spec. Also, Blooberry indicates that very few browsers actually support the non-spec. So, just ignore my suggestion. :D

]]> http://www.maratz.com/blog/archives/2005/05/02/image-preloader/#comment-510 marko Mon, 02 May 2005 22:09:56 +0000 http://www.maratz.com/blog/archives/2005/05/02/image-preloader/#comment-510 I think that <code>lowsrc</code> wasn’t <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/objects.html#h-13.2">w3c recommended attribute</a>, but if someone knows better, please let me know. I think that lowsrc wasn’t w3c recommended attribute, but if someone knows better, please let me know.

]]> http://www.maratz.com/blog/archives/2005/05/02/image-preloader/#comment-509 Jonathan Snook Mon, 02 May 2005 17:45:08 +0000 http://www.maratz.com/blog/archives/2005/05/02/image-preloader/#comment-509 I wonder if specifying a lowsrc on the img itself might not be more effective. I wonder if specifying a lowsrc on the img itself might not be more effective.

]]> http://www.maratz.com/blog/archives/2005/05/02/image-preloader/#comment-508 Graham Mon, 02 May 2005 15:41:05 +0000 http://www.maratz.com/blog/archives/2005/05/02/image-preloader/#comment-508 I like this idea. I have noticed that some browsers will indicate that they have finished loading the page's content before the background images specified through the CSS have actually loaded. This way, there would be something to indicate that I should look for more images to load before I really start focusing on the site. I like this idea. I have noticed that some browsers will indicate that they have finished loading the page’s content before the background images specified through the CSS have actually loaded. This way, there would be something to indicate that I should look for more images to load before I really start focusing on the site.

]]>