On front page the news fades in and out fetching the information from a .txt document. Works in Firefox.
Created attachment 8697 [details]
The news ticker uses either filter:progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.alpha or -moz-opacity (Mozilla extension, roughly equivalent to standard CSS3 opacity).
Regardless of whether Safari gains support for -moz-opacity, it may make sense to use a standard CSS3 selector in the JS code.
In Mozilla, it is supported starting with version 1.7: <http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/CSS:-moz-opacity>, and the meaning of -moz-opacity has subtly changed then. Shipping versions of Safari don't support CSS3 opacity yet, but current development builds already do: <http://nightly.webkit.org>.
That's not true. Shipping versions of Safari *do* support opacity.
(In reply to comment #3)
> That's not true. Shipping versions of Safari *do* support opacity.
Sorry, my bad.
We support it however as opacity, and not as -moz-opacity, since we're not moz :)
The site looks dead now (even DNS resolution fails).
Sounds like adding support for -moz-opacity was not such a great idea - what about filter?
Related to <a href="http://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12944">bug 12944</a>.
Not to be rude but my user agent string for WebKit does contain strings like "Mozilla/5.0" and "like Gecko". Maybe it wouldn't be the end of the world if WebKit were to support things like -moz-opacity instead of only -opacity.
We can't. We temporarily supported -moz-opacity and a prominent Web site (I think Adobe) broke because of misapplying it to WebKit.
Well that is depressing. I hate having to have a copy of Camino around strictly for a small number of websites that still don't work on Safari/Webkit, and the worst part is when the support teams for those websites don't even respond to emails.
It's extremely strange that they didn't use the standard property name, since that is supported in Firefox, Opera and Safari.
(In reply to comment #9)
> Well that is depressing. I hate having to have a copy of Camino around
> strictly for a small number of websites that still don't work on Safari/Webkit,
> and the worst part is when the support teams for those websites don't even
> respond to emails.
Jared, please file an evangelism bug for each web site that doesn't work with Safari so that they may be tracked. Thanks!
Should I change bug 12944 from CSS to Evangelism?
(In reply to comment #12)
> Should I change bug 12944 from CSS to Evangelism?
Yes, please do. Per Comment #8, this bug should be closed as RESOLVED/WONTFIX.
This bug is really that Safari doesn't support -moz-opacity. Nothing to evangelize here.
(In reply to comment #13)
> (In reply to comment #12)
> > Should I change bug 12944 from CSS to Evangelism?
> Yes, please do. Per Comment #8, this bug should be closed as RESOLVED/WONTFIX.
So I close the bug. In addition, the site fixes opacity support. Actually opacity on that site works fine in Webkit.