diff --git a/another_page.html b/another_page.html new file mode 100644 index 0000000..8735928 --- /dev/null +++ b/another_page.html @@ -0,0 +1,134 @@ + +
+
+ So, if you want a hyper link in your site,
+ you need to use the <a> tag, but you have a <link>
+ tag, which links to another file(to import it, which indeed is useful),
+ but like, it could have a more "correct" name, and if you want to get a hyper link
+ you need to use the <a> tag.
+
+ And, I'm not saying you need to remove/replace the link, but like,
+ instead of <a> do something like <hyper>
+ or <hyperlink> or even <hlink>
+ (the last one might be confusing since it looks a lot like link,
+ but it is still better than fucking <a>)
+
+ Boy this page looks blend only with text,
+ and KDE keeps crashing on my laptop...
+
+ (in case you were wondering this div is "width:60%; margin:auto"
+ with some color values)
+
+ Any cool stuff I can try to make? Maybe an animated image
+ which flies in when you scroll down enough?
+
+ Sounds kinda stupid, and I hate it when websites makes scrolling
+ "digital"(by digital I mean it has discrete states, which I know everything
+ in computers are in discrete states since you cannot have the infinity in
+ a computer because reasons, but like, you get the point, its like having
+ a couple of stupid sites stitched on top of each other, which just sucks)
+
+ I will try it tho
+
+ Please enjoy this cute cat while I figure how to get the scroll data... +
+
+ Taadaaa!
+
+ That wasn't hard enough.
+
+ But things to note here, both cats are using `style="float:right;"`
+ (with the sliding one also being invisible until the animation appears)
+ and the animation used is with the `animate` method(and a lot of trial and error)
+
+ Anyway, some questions arise while im doing this, like
+
+ Should websites be interactive at all?
+
+ Of course they should, it's more fun that way!
+
+ But just how much interactivity should we have...
+
+ Forms and Such? Must(for needed websites)
+
+ Animations? Sure, it's fun, but dont push it.
+
+ Games? If you embed a game in your browser that is actually cool,
+ tho you prob shouldn't do it with javascript, or at least javascript shouldn't
+ support it, if we had solutions like the old ass flash player.
+
+ "bUt FlAsH pLaYeR SuX(tm)"
+
+ I said like...
+ And something is approaching, called wasm, or web assmbly.
+
+ But that brings another question to mind
+
+ How far should we push our browsers?
+
+ Because Like,
+ with html(and css) only, you are getting something that is ONLY drawing instrctions(and animations?),
+ but it is all visuals(or should be), instructions on how to paint,
+ so if i decide to make a css-less browser(like metamuffin did),
+ then everything should still work(but look like shit), which is awesome.
+
+ If i dont "trust" CSS i can just disable it.
+
+ But with JavaScript, it is a fully blown scripting language(a shitty one but still),
+ people made countless things with js, from fully featured web games, to a bloody backend system(why?).
+
+ Also JavaScript is a script running locally, so if the browser did a bad job sandboxing it from the system,
+ some bad things may happen
+
+
+ Welcome to my awesome test site, + I will Attempt to learn html using it, + and you can view my progress here(i guess)... +
++ Why am i doing this for myself? + Because it is about time I learn to make websites + (and i want to really know how bad js is and if ts is actually any good) +
+
+ Imma do a lot of dumb shit here, like not centering this text.
+
+ And also giving it different colors
+
+ But enough with the games! +
+ A button +
+ +
+ As you can see, clicking that button changes the background.
+
+ But something to note here, while you set colors usually using "#012345"
+ when you retrieve those colors using js, it gives you a string
+ like "rgb(1, 35, 69)" instead, which i find dumb and annoying...
+
+ Also, i made this part appear only after you clicked the button, + because i can! +
+
+ Another thing to note here, is that even tho some stuff
+ might have 2 options(technically) and could be used as a bool,
+ since CSS and everything, you have multiple values for them,
+ so instead of doing "visibility = true" you do "visibility = inherit"
+
+ (i use inherit because you might never know if the parent is visible
+ or not and we are trying to not cause weird bugs on our first day)
+
+ Now imma make a slider, which may or may not do something extre
+
+ Only one way to find out!
+
+ And now, I will attempt to animate this div +
+ ++ The last animation was made using the `setInterval` and `clearInterval` + built in function, + but this one will use the `animate` built in function + (I really hope it works well) +
+ +
+ This is indeed MUCH MUCH better. BUT, it is experimental
+ and not supported on everything or something
+ (like Safari, and also IE but that is deprecated).
+
+ Basically you can set keyframes, and pass some more stuff,
+ but most noteable you dont need to store the id of the interval
+ anywhere and you can simply fire and forget
+ (but just in case you can give it an id which is great)
+
+ This page is getting crowded so imma attemp at creating an hyper link
+ to another page on the site
+
+ I am really not sure how it works
+