No-Java, all-CSS dropdown menu

[ktinkel]

This very intresting horizontal dropdown menu (http://www.stunicholls.myby.co.uk/menus/dropdownfun.html) uses tables (rather than JavaScript) to create the secondary (dropdown) menu lists. It works with most browsers, including MSIE.

Oh — it requires use of XHTML 1.1 DOCTYPE; and it does not validate. But it does seem to work.

By Stu Nicholls, whose site altogether warrants a bit of exploration. Many other menu ideas, layouts (including a CSS frame), no-graphic methods of creating round-cornered and even trickier box shapes, and some CSS animation tricks.

Useful? Maybe not always. But clever, and reading his explanations often illuminates some puzzling bit of CSS.

[annc]

This very intresting horizontal dropdown menu (http://www.stunicholls.myby.co.uk/menus/dropdownfun.html) uses tables (rather than JavaScript) to create the secondary (dropdown) menu lists. It works with most browsers, including MSIE.

Oh — it requires use of XHTML 1.1 DOCTYPE; and it does not validate. But it does seem to work.

By Stu Nicholls, whose site altogether warrants a bit of exploration. Many other menu ideas, layouts (including a CSS frame), no-graphic methods of creating round-cornered and even trickier box shapes, and some CSS animation tricks.

Useful? Maybe not always. But clever, and reading his explanations often illuminates some puzzling bit of CSS.Yes, I like Stu's site. I myself use one that just has a little JavaScript for the MSIE mob. It works really well.

Incidentally, I'm planning to put ads on the forum pages of my site, and the program I'm using, phpAdsNew, works best with a JavaScript invocation code. So I ran a poll of members, and found that only one in 20 doesn't have JavaScript enabled.

[ktinkel]

… I ran a poll of members, and found that only one in 20 doesn't have JavaScript enabled.Sounds reasonable to me. Most people just accept what they have, and that usually includes JavaScript.

[annc]

Sounds reasonable to me. Most people just accept what they have, and that usually includes JavaScript.That's what I thought, and use a piece of JavaScript to hide my e-mail address on web sites from spammers.

But when I mentioned that in INETPUB, a couple of people (Kelvyn and Dennis, I think) told me that, for example, most firefox users disabled JavaScript.

Maybe I'm 'fortunate' in that most people who use my site use IE.

[ktinkel]

… when I mentioned that in INETPUB, a couple of people (Kelvyn and Dennis, I think) told me that, for example, most firefox users disabled JavaScript.I wonder. There ought to be some more objective stats around, no?

They may know mostly very web-savvy people. Regular people are usually just grateful to make their way around without obvious disaster!

[LoisWakeman]

But when I mentioned that in INETPUB, a couple of people (Kelvyn and Dennis, I think) told me that, for example, most firefox users disabled JavaScript.
Ann: I admire both Dennis and Kelvyn immensely, but I would take that with a big pinch of salt. It is true that FireFox users tend to be more web-literate on average (they know how to change browsers for a start!), so they are also more likely to understand and manage the risks (such as they are) of javascript: FF makes security easy to tailor to one's usage.

I use FF and allow JS, and do not think I am unusual in that. (But I have no more evidence to back it up than whoever made the original statement!)

[ktinkel]

I use FF and allow JS, and do not think I am unusual in that. (But I have no more evidence to back it up than whoever made the original statement!)Me too — on both counts!

[annc]

Ann: I admire both Dennis and Kelvyn immensely, but I would take that with a big pinch of salt. It is true that FireFox users tend to be more web-literate on average (they know how to change browsers for a start!), so they are also more likely to understand and manage the risks (such as they are) of javascript: FF makes security easy to tailor to one's usage.

I use FF and allow JS, and do not think I am unusual in that. (But I have no more evidence to back it up than whoever made the original statement!)I thought that one of them quoted a survey to support the statement, but confess that I haven't been back to INETPUB and the somewhat flaky CIS Advanced Search function to check.

[donmcc]

I wonder. There ought to be some more objective stats around, no?

Like this (http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2005/June/javas.php) ?

It matches Annes estimate

[ktinkel]

Like this (http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2005/June/javas.php) ?

It matches Annes estimateAnn’s estimate? Yes, it does. And mine.

[Kelvyn]

when I mentioned that in INETPUB, a couple of people (Kelvyn and Dennis, I think) told me that, for example, most firefox users disabled JavaScript

Not me! The worst stats I have seen were 11% with JS disabled in the US a couple of weeks after 9/11

True figures are probably about 2-5%, and most of those will be corporate users who have no choice! The June figures from counter.com (http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2005/June/javas.php) show an international rate of 3% JS turned off.

[annc]

Not me! The worst stats I have seen were 11% with JS disabled in the US a couple of weeks after 9/11

True figures are probably about 2-5%, and most of those will be corporate users who have no choice! The June figures from counter.com (http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2005/June/javas.php) show an international rate of 3% JS turned off.Oops, sorry, Kelvyn. Those figures are much more encouraging, and something I think I can live with when designing pages. My e-mail address is hidden from harvesters via a snippet of JavaScript on several web sites, and nobody has ever complained about not being able to see it.

[dacoyle]

Ann: I admire both Dennis and Kelvyn immensely, but I would take that with a big pinch of salt. It is true that FireFox users tend to be more web-literate on average (they know how to change browsers for a start!), so they are also more likely to understand and manage the risks (such as they are) of javascript: FF makes security easy to tailor to one's usage.


Don't remember the discussion, but it is easy to disable javascript in Firefox. I don't bother often.

The quote I do remember was something I learned from my boss earlier this year, a poll of a group of Yahoo users where 40% had javascript disabled. But I don't know what that population of users was.

Dennis

[annc]

The quote I do remember was something I learned from my boss earlier this year, a poll of a group of Yahoo users where 40% had javascript disabled. But I don't know what that population of users was.
Ah, that sounds very much like the quote I remember. I think it had a major effect on George, too, because at the time he was considering using a JavaScript snippet I'd recommended for masking e-mail addresses.

[dacoyle]

Ah, that sounds very much like the quote I remember. I think it had a major effect on George, too, because at the time he was considering using a JavaScript snippet I'd recommended for masking e-mail addresses.

I follow the Federal standards on javascript. If the use of java or javascript is essential to the content or navigation, I don't use it. Period. About the only time I use it now is for an automatic "This page last updated on..." in my footers, which isn't really essential content.

We use to have some hover buttons using javascript, but that's not necessary with CSS available now.

Dennis

[George]

Ah, that sounds very much like the quote I remember. I think it had a major effect on George, too, because at the time he was considering using a JavaScript snippet I'd recommended for masking e-mail addresses.

It did have a major affect on me. And, it just makes sense to me to think, at least for now, that Java is irrelevant--maybe, ok for professional designers in certain situations. However, regarding the e-mail, I just had an extra e-mail address that was given to me, so I decided to see what would happen if I used it. I had noted many people simply were not having problems without a diversion. Neither am I so far.

I win a lottery out of the Uk about once a week for 6 to 10 million dollars, and about once a week a widow in Nigeria wants to donate the same amount. However, I had the same good fortune before I put the page on line. I've never let them know I don't really need the money.

However, I get a few e-mails at another address on advertizing the site. I guess these come from my host listing. Usually, they are blank and have no content.

Oh well, we'll see how it continues to go.

Regards,

George

[annc]

I had noted many people simply were not having problems without a diversion. Neither am I so far. Oh, well, if the spam and viruses start to build up too far, you can just ditch that account and look again at some form of masking.

[dthomsen8]

I have JavaScript and Flash shut off in Firefox, and on in Internet Explorer. Mostly I use Firefox, and only when I particulary want to see something do I switch to IE.

Also the Multiple Listing Service for Southeast Pennsylvania uses IE exclusively.