|
|
You're in the
flash (macromedia)
group:Is it possible to have a multilayered html flash document?
flash (macromedia):
Hi. i am creating a site, and was wondering if it is possible to have a
multilayered html document using flash elements. so in the final html document you would have several swf's. i need it to be inside the html because i want the main swf to stay centered and i want the other swfs to align with the top and bottom corners, so when you drag the browser window larger and smaller the main swf is always in the middle, and the other swfs are round the corners of the browser. cheers
Curious to know if you tried editing your html page with Dreamweaver. Add a
first layer with your second swf file. Another layer for the remaining swf file. The catch (and somehow there's always a catch) is that layers are not supported by every browsers. Hope this helps and good luck. ezflip
I'm not working with dreamweaver, guys, so I can't join the discussion about
layers. However, your task seems a simple job for a HTML table. You could even specify that the middle row+column don't scale and the others do. And to your first question, Martin, of course it's possible to have more than one SWF in a HTML. Many portals have for instance a number of flash advertisements on the page. Wolf
Oh, oh. Overlapping SWF's is very unreliable, and different from browser to
browser. In a word: avoid. The reason is that there is no z-order objects adhere to, so you can never say which one is on top. Different alignment with tables - I've attached HTML code for a 3x3 table, with the middle cell being 550x400, in other words the default flash stage size, and the cells around to fill the rest of the browser window equally. You can also see some alignment there. Hope that helps Wolf <table border="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td align="left"> </td> <td width="550"> </td> <td align="right"> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="400" align="left"> </td> <td align="center" width="550" height="400">Here goes the main SWF</td> <td height="400" align="right"> </td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left"> </td> <td width="550"> </td> <td align="right"> </td> </tr> </table>
ahh, that's great! works really well,
is there anyway to get them to align with the bottom of the page. i can see how
to align horizontally, just when you align with the bottom and pull the window smaller, because of the scroll bar it just get's cut off.
You will have to use an additional height="100%" in the <table> tag, and the in the last row: <td valign="bottom">This is at the very end</td>
Good luck Wolf
nah, that doesn't seem to work. it still stays where it is at the bottom.
so far i have this
weird, i've just checked, and it works in internet explorer, but not safari
it seems height is an invalid html term, which would explain why it's not working in safari.
Martin, if you really want to fill the browser window even if there's not
enough "material", like in your example, you will need to resort to absolute positioning. This will show in browsers that adhere to the CSS2 specification. IE from 4, Firefox, Opera and Safari should be able to show it. Older Netscape versions with a question mark. This would look like the attached code. <body> <div style="position:absolute;left:0px;top:0px">top left</div> <div style="position:absolute;left:50%;top:0px">top middle </div> <div style="position:absolute;right:0px;top:0px">right top</div> <div style="position:absolute;left:0px;top:50%">middle left </div> <div style="position:absolute;left:50%;top:50%">middle middle </div> <div style="position:absolute;right:0px;top:50%">right middle </div> <div style="position:absolute;left:0px;bottom:0px">bottom left </div> <div style="position:absolute;left:50%;bottom:0px">bottom middle </div> <div style="position:absolute;right:0px;bottom:0px">right bottom</div> </body>
great that works in safari.
when you say not enough 'material', how would i make it enough? is that the best way to do this, with one 800x600 swf in the middle, and a few 300x100 swf's in the corners?
i've managed to do it, but i don't know if there's a better way of doing it.
i used the original flash file, which generated this html: <object classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" codebase="http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab# version=8,0,0,0" scale="noscale" width="100%" height="100%" id="portfolio" align="middle"> <param name="allowScriptAccess" value="sameDomain" /> <param name="movie" value="portfolio.swf" /> <param name="quality" value="best" /> <param name="scale" value="noscale" /> <param name="wmode" value="transparent" /> <embed src="portfolio.swf" quality="best" scale="noscale" wmode="transparent" width="100%" height="100%" name="portfolio" align="middle" allowscriptaccess="sameDomain" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" /> </object> and then i used you're html: <div style="position:absolute;left:0px;bottom:0px"> <object classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#ve rsion=7,0,19,0" width="100" height="100"> <param name="movie" value="anim.swf" /> <param name="quality" value="high" /> <embed src="anim.swf" quality="high" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100" height="100"></embed> </object> </div> is there anything wrong with this?
Good to know it works.
Well, I didn't mean all that much. Most of the major sites are now laid out for 800x600 overall, and that includes the browser menus and toolbars. So I guess going with the standard stage size 550x400 and some "corner SWFs" about 200x100 is a fair choice. (Plus minus, of course, depends what your content is) Here on my home computer I have 1024x768, the difference to 800x600 is really not that much, and when I work on my laptop I have a 1400x1050 resolution, but I never open a browser window to the max. To me it's a bit like "paper page" layout: Don't be afraid of white space :-) What I meant with my comment was just that you tested with only three lines of text, and those are not realistic conditions.
here's the actual link:
Looks ok. Great.
I've just typed a long response to your 800x600 but it got lost :-( In a nutshell: 800X600 is good as an overall size, don't forget there's menu bars and toolbars and so on. Very few people have screen resolutions > 1024x768. So I would go with something close to the standard stage size of 550x400 and your "corner" swfs
here's the link:
Yeah, happens to me, too. Don't worry.
right, now i'm buggered again!
the site is pretty much finished and i tested it. here is the link: http://www.othersidecreation.com/martin/test/portfolio.html in internet explorer the 'wmode="transparent"' tag i'm using to make the flash movies transparent is working perfectly. but in safari it only shows overlaying areas as transparent. also the flash playback in safari is SOOOOOOOO much slower than the internet explorer version! what THE HELL IS GOING ON!!! HELP!!
Nothing can be done against that.
It's the wmode="transparent"' that creates all sorts of trouble. Do you need transparency? I thought you had separated the stuff out? Isn't that how this all had started?
well, i decided not to use transparent swf's and instead decided to use static
png's instead. but for some reason on a pc, the images aren't showing the transpareny. on a mac it works just fine, in IE and safari. also on a pc the random images in the background don't seem to be showing up. just either white or the condensation one. there must be something wrong with the html, but i dunno what. and ideas?
right, in so far as the transparent png's, i now understand that pc's don't
support that. bugger! so is there a way i can use a script in the html that will load the images on a mac but not on a pc?
Sure, you could do browser recognition, either via javascript in the HTML or
using server-side script. But I'd say: SIMPLIFY, don't try to push it to the max. Whatever clever stuff you might come up with is surely not going to work with the next browser generation. Cheers ;-) Wolf
Don't see what you're looking for? Try a search.
|
July 2003
August 2003
September 2003
October 2003
November 2003
December 2003
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
| home · blog · groups | Questions? Comments? Contact the dn |