| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Topic |
Shir Akeena
Panta-Rhei
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
    |
Posted - 2008.06.12 14:14:00 -
[1]
I wonder if CCP is thinking about integrating a IGB capable of modern XHMTL/CSS/JS techniques.
That would spare us a lot of work making every website and EVE related web-application twice: one for modern browsers with decent webbish look and feel and one crappy table-style HTML 3.x for the EVE-IGB.
This looks a quite promising candidate:
http://meta.nuanti.com/
What do you think?
Regards, Shir
--
Praise the Lord and hand over the ammunition |
Shir Akeena
Panta-Rhei
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 14:14:00 -
[2]
I wonder if CCP is thinking about integrating a IGB capable of modern XHMTL/CSS/JS techniques.
That would spare us a lot of work making every website and EVE related web-application twice: one for modern browsers with decent webbish look and feel and one crappy table-style HTML 3.x for the EVE-IGB.
This looks a quite promising candidate:
http://meta.nuanti.com/
What do you think?
Regards, Shir |
achoura
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 14:42:00 -
[3]
The igb is purposely gimped to prevent executables in eve clients. Number of ways thos thing can capture keystrokes...
***The EVE servers and their patches*** |
Cyberman Mastermind
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 12:00:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Cyberman Mastermind on 13/06/2008 12:00:09
 Originally by: Shir Akeena
I wonder if CCP is thinking about integrating a IGB capable of modern XHMTL/CSS/JS techniques.
There is a thread in Features & Ideas about the IGB and upgrading it.
Thread
(Note: This is not a pedantic post. This board has no search function...)
As I said in the other thread, JS isn't necessary and might indeed cause more problems than it's worth.
Originally by: achoura
The igb is purposely gimped to prevent executables in eve clients. Number of ways thos thing can capture keystrokes...
I really wish I could believe that. But I'd be willing to bet a months income(ISK of course) that the real reason is that someone at CCP had great ideas, started to implement them, and stopped (for whatever reason).
Personally, I'd rather write sites for IE than for the IGB. Better documented and more functions.
The in-game functions are cool, though. |
Conq Er
Sweetrock Mining
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 17:21:00 -
[5]
Quote:
The work is being driven by Linden Lab
No, thank you.
|
Xtiva
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 19:21:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Xtiva on 13/06/2008 19:25:11
It's nice in theory, but does anyone know of a javascript library written in python?
If not (which is my thought) then CCP would have to write one from scratch, just to please a few users. Everyone whines about JS and flash, but the IGB was never meant to replace IE/Firefox/Opera/whatever you use. It serves it's purpose perfectly, which was to display mission info, character details, and other in-game stuff. I develop for the IGB and would personally like to see a few improvements such as CSS floats and faster table rendering or a fixed width font, but we have to realize that JS will probably never make it into the IGB and for good reason. The security nightmare that would come out of javascript is not worth it.
Not to mention, any serious web designer would STILL make a custom page for the IGB. Why? Because of the resolution it runs at. A common web browser runs at 800x600 or 1024x768. The smallest size the IGB runs at is about a quarter of a 1024x768 screen, which even with a 800x600 page, would look horrible, or have to be resized to take up your entire eve session. Maybe I'm wrong, but the point of the IGB to me is to not have to switch to a web browser to view content. Having to resize the window to your entire session is just as intrusive as switching to an external window.
Oh wait, you aren't serious web developers ...
Originally by: Cyberman Mastermind
Personally, I'd rather write sites for IE than for the IGB. Better documented and more functions.
The in-game functions are cool, though.
Because a real web developer writes for a compliant browser, then worries about IE support. If you write for IE first, you spend MUCH more time trying to get it working in every normal browser. Unless of course you don't care about anyone else.
Just my 0.02 isk
|
Cyberman Mastermind
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 14:14:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Xtiva
Oh wait, you aren't serious web developers ...
Originally by: Cyberman Mastermind
Personally, I'd rather write sites for IE than for the IGB. Better documented and more functions.
The in-game functions are cool, though.
Because a real web developer writes for a compliant browser, then worries about IE support.
???
Where did I say I'd write a page for IE first, then compliant browsers? I specifically mentioned IE BECAUSE of it's broken rendering of HTML/CSS, and because I have to spend hours to figure out what it didn't know this time whenever I try a new page.
But there still is better support and documentation for IE than for the IGB. And it knows more HTML/CSS, weird as that may be.
--------------------------------------------------
I'm a rich person. How I know? I can afford to be a miner. |
Guilliman R
PRO Space Hunters
HUNTER'S BROTHERHOOD
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 09:45:00 -
[8]
you just wan to watch pron in eve, admit it
---sig---
|
Talaan Stardrifter
|
Posted - 2008.06.18 12:36:00 -
[9]
No to scripting
Yes to renderer streamlining
Yes to drag&drop item form fields
|
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |