Marquee Tags (HTML)

[blackcoder41]

I'd like to help but I don't see any wrong behavior with IE7. BTW, don't use frames.

[Disch]

<offtopic>
The topic of this thread keeps reminding me of this xkcd:

http://xkcd.com/554/

[thepedestrian]

Ok, I've spent extensive time looking at the code and trying different ways to get it to work. There are two problems I found which I think are most likely causing these problems. 1) The code isn't valid and so I believe this might be causing the problem. Remember code renders in HTML 4 (just look at the source code). For example, the iframe isn't a self-closing tag. The proper way to close it is <iframe></iframe>. Anyways the point is that the browser is determining "valid" code--if that makes sense. 2) The structure isn't made in a top-down structure and there are some issues with the CSS. For example, I think the attribute #kika might be causing problems.

Anyways I'm not 100% sure what the problem is and the browsers always interpret the code to what they think is valid so I'm not getting the entire picture. Can you maybe zip up the site and I'll take a look.

[thepedestrian]

@rapidcoder
Flash and Java are both very vulnerable. Infact, on all my personal computers, I have Java turned off in the browser because its just so vulnerable. As far as compatibility is concerned, browsers have gotten much more streamlined (Webkit: Safari, Chrome, IE); but even then, you work with a product long enough, you know how things are going to render differently in different browsers and so you work with those differences. Most moderns browsers now are on the same page and almost all web-users keep up with browser updates so it's definitely not bad.

Giving browser native support makes for a safer web. It's not like the old times where getting everyone up to date on one particular page takes years. Massive expansion of the internet has allowed us to bridge this gap. The way the web is progression now is not like the old days of IE6.

HTML5 is in its infancy stages but you have to start somewhere. I'm not saying that HTML5 will replace Flash because there is just so much advance stuff you can do with Flash. At the end of the day, I do not expect HTML5 to render nice maps that I see on Google or advance interactive charts. But I do want the browser to have native support for elements such as audio, video, and simple rendering of elements. All in all, we have to remember that HTML is a markup language and it can never replace technologies like Flash or Java. But some elements should have native support and that is the argument for HTML5.

[Kyon]

Thepedestrian, I'm going to zip the page, just note that before I added more images at the right marquee, everything worked perfect. Once the amount of them caused the height to become bigger than that of the defined height, it started stretching.

[rapidcoder]

I have Java turned off in the browser because its just so vulnerable

LOL. For better security, you should do just the opposite - disable the browser and enable Java. JRE has better security record than Firefox, at least in 2010:

Secunia Advisories for JRE 6 in 2010: 3 total, 0 critical, 0 unpatched
Secunia Advisories for Java Webstart 6 in 2010: 0 total, 0 critical, 0 unpatched
Secunia Advisories for Firefox 3.5 in 2010: 11 total, 1 critical, 0 unpatched

https://secunia.com/advisories/product/12878/?task=statistics_2010
https://secunia.com/advisories/product/25800/?task=statistics_2010

[chrisname]

Firefox actually isn't all that good a browser. If someone would write a compatibility layer so I could run my add-ons on Chromium, I'd switch in a heartbeat. I'd do it but I wouldn't know what language to use, I might not know that language anyway, and I wouldn't know how to actually do it.

[thepedestrian]

@kyon
Did you send a link via PM because I did not receive the PM.

@rapidcoder
I really hope you can see the fallacy in the statistics you are using to support your claim. I'm also appalled by your suggestion of disabling the browser and enabling Java. I'm not sure how disabling an internet browser will give me access to Gmail or even these forums.

Java is vulnerable because you have to realize that majority of the populous using the web is not tech-savvy. Also Java will run using JRE so its much more vulnerable than having a browser addon which only rely on XML, HTML, and Javascript.

Maybe it's just me but I really don't get the statistics nor do I think they are applicable because internet (therefore browser) is where you are going to get these viruses. Java is only applicable to apps that you have installed on your computer and if you don't access the internet, then you have no way of getting a virus.

[Kyon]

I didn't install a zipper (or whatever you want to call it) on my iMac yet, so I'm still looking. I'll make the zip on a PC later today (after 18:00 for me, probably).

[PiMaster]

@thepedestrian, how are his statistics fallacious? They support the claims he made - JRE showed a lower virus count than Firefox, and 1 of Firefox's viruses was critical.

Also, if you're going to make the argument that Java is vulnerable to viruses when it is in contact with the internet because viruses come from it, then you also have to accept the fact that executable files that you download are vulnerable, especially those that use the internet, which includes your browser. If we follow your logic, then we should cut off all contact with the internet and use only the applications that come with your OS.

[rapidcoder]

I'm also appalled by your suggestion of disabling the browser and enabling Java

I was just joking, man.

Anyway I'm appalled by someone claiming they disable Java for security reasons and they don't:
1. disable Flash
2. disable Adobe Reader (which had a long unpatched, 0-day remote vulnerability in JavaScript in 2010)
3. disable JavaScript (which accounts for many vulnerabilities detected in browsers)
4. restrain from downloading anything from the net (you are aware that trusted sites can be hijacked and poisoned with viruses, exploits etc?)

Disabling Java without disabling all of these doesn't make your system significantly more secure.
Well - saves you from 3 possible vulnerabilities in 2010 (which had been immediately patched)

Java is vulnerable because you have to realize that majority of the populous using the web is not tech-savvy.

Oh, I see. So you are afraid that Java (or insert any other technology here) can do too much, when the user allows it to do. But this is a problem of the user, not any plugin.

Also Java will run using JRE so its much more vulnerable than having a browser addon which only rely on XML, HTML, and Javascript

Practice has shown many times that this is a logical fallacy. The client language has very little to do with vulnerabilities. There were even remote exploits in JPEG images. :P

[chrisname]

@thepedestrian,
Sorry, but I have to agree with rapidcoder. Your argument is rent with fallacy.

[Kyon]

I searched up a old JavaScript that would make images continuously shift (to the left) and tried to edit it to make it go up instead of left. Since I'm not too great at JavaScript, I didn't succeed. If someone knows how to, please do so:

<script language="JavaScript1.2">
<!--
var breedte=150
var hoogte=545
var snelheid=2
agrondkleur="#FFFFFF"
var afbeelding=new Array()
afbeelding[0]='<img class="s" src="http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/7795/busscherssta.jpg"></img>'
afbeelding[1]='<img class="s" src="http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/1271/munsterhuisgeluidsadvie.jpg"></img>'
afbeelding[2]='<img class="s" src="http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/9697/olafhairdesign.jpg"></img>'
afbeelding[3]='<img class="s" src="http://img121.imageshack.us/img121/6236/hulsschilderwerken.jpg"></img>'
afbeelding[4]='<img class="s" src="http://img94.imageshack.us/img94/3108/peterslammerinkarchitec.jpg"></img>'
afbeelding[5]='<img class="s" src="http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/6131/logobeltmanarchitecten2.jpg"></img>'
afbeelding[6]='<img class="s" src="http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/8938/ntpz.jpg"></img>'
afbeelding[7]='<img class="s" src="http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/9761/beethoven.jpg"></img>'
afbeelding[8]='<img class="s" src="http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/8181/vanheck.jpg"></img>'
afbeelding[9]='<img class="s" src="http://img252.imageshack.us/img252/3796/ekkelboom.jpg"></img>'

//Hieronder niets meer wijzigen
var kopieersnelheid=snelheid
afbeelding='<nobr>'+afbeelding.join(" ")+'</nobr>'
var iedom=document.all||document.getElementById
if (iedom)
document.write('<span id="temp" style="visibility:hidden;position:absolute;top:-100;left:-3000">'+afbeelding+'</span>')
var huidige_breedte=''

function opvullen(){
if (iedom){
afb=document.getElementById? document.getElementById("test2") : document.all.test2
afb2=document.getElementById? document.getElementById("test3") : document.all.test3
afb.innerHTML=afb2.innerHTML=afbeelding
huidige_breedte=document.all? afb.offsetWidth : document.getElementById("temp").offsetWidth
afb2.style.left=huidige_breedte+4
}
else if (document.layers){
ns_slide=document.netscape.document.netscape2
ns_slide2=document.netscape.document.netscape3
ns_slide.document.write(afbeelding)
ns_slide.document.close()
huidige_breedte=ns_slide.document.width
ns_slide2.left=huidige_breedte+4
ns_slide2.document.write(afbeelding)
ns_slide2.document.close()
}
lefttime=setInterval("schuiflinks()",30)
}
window.onload=opvullen

function schuiflinks(){
if (iedom){
if (parseInt(afb.style.left)>(huidige_breedte*(-1)+8))
afb.style.left=parseInt(afb.style.left)-kopieersnelheid
else
afb.style.left=parseInt(afb2.style.left)+huidige_breedte+4

if (parseInt(afb2.style.left)>(huidige_breedte*(-1)+8))
afb2.style.left=parseInt(afb2.style.left)-kopieersnelheid
else
afb2.style.left=parseInt(afb.style.left)+huidige_breedte+4

}
else if (document.layers){
if (ns_slide.left>(huidige_breedte*(-1)+8))
ns_slide.left-=kopieersnelheid
else
ns_slide.left=ns_slide2.left+huidige_breedte+4

if (ns_slide2.left>(huidige_breedte*(-1)+8))
ns_slide2.left-=kopieersnelheid
else
ns_slide2.left=ns_slide.left+huidige_breedte+4
}
}

if (iedom||document.layers){
with (document){
document.write('<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"><td>')
if (iedom){
write('<div style="position:relative;width:'+breedte+';height:'+hoogte+';overflow:hidden">')
write('<div style="position:absolute;width:'+breedte+';height:'+hoogte+';background-color:'+agrondkleur+'" onMouseover="kopieersnelheid=0" onMouseout="kopieersnelheid=snelheid">')
write('<div id="test2" style="position:absolute;left:0;top:0"></div>')
write('<div id="test3" style="position:absolute;left:-1000;top:0"></div>')
write('</div></div>')
}
else if (document.layers){
write('<ilayer width='+breedte+' height='+hoogte+' name="netscape" bgColor='+agrondkleur+'>')
write('<layer name="netscape2" left=0 top=0 onMouseover="kopieersnelheid=0" onMouseout="kopieersnelheid=snelheid"></layer>')
write('<layer name="netscape3" left=0 top=0 onMouseover="kopieersnelheid=0" onMouseout="kopieersnelheid=snelheid"></layer>')
write('</ilayer>')
}
document.write('</td></table>')
}
}
-->
</script>

EDIT:
<offtopic>

Disch wrote:

<offtopic>
The topic of this thread keeps reminding me of this xkcd:

http://xkcd.com/554/

That xkcd reminds me of this xkcd:

http://xkcd.com/303/

[thepedestrian]

@rapidcoder
I'm not arguing that Java is the only vulnerable technology but in my personal experience, I've found Java and Java applets to be much more vulnerable. I guess how I did not clearly convey this so apologies but I think I have the right to my own opinion. I can find more bugs in Java than Flash but I think that's just going around in circle.

Also, if you can elaborate on this, I would be appreciated:

"Practice has shown many times that this is a logical fallacy. The client language has very little to do with vulnerabilities. There were even remote exploits in JPEG images. :P"

@kyon
Use the link I've provided below. You will need to download jQuery. Actually, it will be included in the package. Download, include, and you are good to go.

http://jscroller.markusbordihn.de/

[rapidcoder]

I can find more bugs in Java than Flash but I think that's just going around in circle.

Bugs != vulnerabilities.

Comparing bug rates of both tehchnologies is pointless, because Java/Silverlight have much richer functionality and much more advanced runtime systems (anything you can do with Flash can be done with Java/Silverlight but not the other way round). Taking it to the extreme, it would be like saying a hello-world program is less vulnerable than Linux because it obviously has no bugs and Linux kernel has many.

So maybe HTML5 is a competition for Flash (but I doubt it until good GUI design tools are created for HTML5), but not for Java/Silverlight. Different target, different applications. I think they will coexist.

The client language has very little to do with vulnerabilities. There were even remote exploits in JPEG images. :P" 

I can't see what is unclear in this. JavaScript is code. Java is code. ActionScript is code. Something that accepts code in whatever language from the network is at risk. Regardless of whether it is JavaScript, ActionScript or Java.

[Kyon]

Thepedestrian, how does this jscroller work? I've got the following code, yet it still ceises to work:

...
<script type="text/javascript" src="jquery.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="jscroller.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript">
$(document).ready(function(){
$jScroller.add("#sponsors","#bob","up",1,1);
$jScroller.cache.init = true;
$jScroller.start();
});
</script>

<div id="sponsors">
<div id="bob" style="left:5%;top:2.5%;height:95%;width:90%;background:white;overflow:hidden;white-space:nowrap;">
<img class="s" src="http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/7795/busscherssta.jpg"/><br/>
<img class="s" src="http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/1271/munsterhuisgeluidsadvie.jpg"/><br/>
<img class="s" src="http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/9697/olafhairdesign.jpg"/><br/>
<img class="s" src="http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/6236/hulsschilderwerken.jpg"/><p/>
<img class="s" src="http://img94.imageshack.us/img94/3108/peterslammerinkarchitec.jpg"/><p/>
<img class="s" src="http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/6131/logobeltmanarchitecten2.jpg"/><p/>
<img class="s" src="http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/8938/ntpz.jpg"/><p/>
<img class="s" src="http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/9761/beethoven.jpg"/><br/>
<img class="s" src="http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/8181/vanheck.jpg"/><br/>
<img class="s" src="http://img252.imageshack.us/img252/3796/ekkelboom.jpg"/>

<img class="s" src="http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/904/hartman.jpg"/>
<img class="s" src="http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/3710/abbinkzonderadres.jpg"/>
<img class="s" src="http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/3339/logoschreuderstekst.jpg"/>
<img class="s" src="http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/5036/logonoorderdieppp.jpg"/>
<img class="s" src="http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/8095/maillpv.jpg"/>
</div>
</div>
...

Note that this is not on the website, I'm doing the editing on a local version of the website.

[thepedestrian]

@Kyon
Did you get my PM?

[Kyon]

Sorry for not reacting, I've been busy, but yes, I did receive it. There was however one problem with it; it still didn't loop through without whitespace. If possible, I'd like it to continuously display the contents.