The site's just in the proposal state, right now, but that's one of the upgrades they wanted to their current display method.
Hopefully, they'll approve the proposal any day now and I'll be more than happy to share the implementation! :o) Rick On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Jack Killpatrick <j...@ihwy.com> wrote: > Agreed on the behavior, that's how I'd want it to act, too. > > Is the site you're putting the gallery on public? I'm just curious, because > in the past I did a lot of real estate related web work (with a company > called InteliTouch: CRM for real estate agents) and am always curious about > interesting uses. > > Thx. > Jack > > Rick Faircloth wrote: > > That could be a problem for some. > > For my purposes (showing real estate photos), all the photos will be > resized to the same size, > so that shouldn't be an issue. > > Actually, even if I had both landscape and portrait photos, I'd prefer that > the container remain > the same size for speed and for consistency in the space for comments. > It's less attractive > than having the full window taken up by the image, but the constant > shifting of the window size > is distracting to me. > > Rick > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 12:36 PM, Jack Killpatrick <j...@ihwy.com> wrote: > >> Cool. The one thing I wonder about is mixed images in landscape and >> portrait modes. Most gallery demos don't show that, I'm guessing cuz it's >> less pretty, but from my experience it's often matters. I haven't looked >> carefully at that one to see how it will handle those. >> >> - Jack >> > > -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "It has been my experience that most bad government is the result of too much government." - Thomas Jefferson
