Urgent - need help

[fuzzylunkin1]

If you do auto play at all

"I'll kill you"

[Croc]

Can't argue with that. Noted - Autoplay = new croc skin boots

[TheBored]

Had to do some fixin there, eh Rav?

Croc, ZGs fall under Rav, the Events ZL. It isn't 'kinda its own zone'. Don't take this too seriously though, I have no idea what the context was that you said it in

TB

[Raveen]

Zone Games are Semi autonomous though. But yes, the buck stops with me.

TB, can you spot where I gave up on MrCs post

[madpeople]

QUOTE (Croc @ Feb 24 2009, 03:44 AM) Mad - As I stated in my reply, I'm more than happy to not have the hidden attribute there - it was just an example of code.

The problem is, the code you posted said the exact opposite of what people want / said exactly what they hate.
Things shouldn't be hidden, and they shouldn't auto play, especially audio.

You asked for perission to do soomething like that and we said "hell no, we hate that!"


QUOTE Then I'm completely justified in wanting to.[/quote]
I don't see why you would put a hidden=true attibute on a video, especially when you've said it will be audio only

QUOTE the sounds on the internet issue is hardly a point of contention[/quote]
Actually, it is. It is the subject of this topic - introducing sounds to a web page, you say you want to do it, we say we really really hate sounds that auto play, that we can't turn off, and that we didn't choose to play, and that ambushed us unawares.
QUOTE No one has refuted my claim directly within this thread, or indeed anywhere - they have offered personal opinions (unless you can show that anyone here works for the W3C and sounds are in fact, against current internet standards for pages) on how they feel about specifically embedded sounds that they cannot turn off, and in the other thread, comments regard the sites they view, or the fact that they have sound always off or not working.[/quote]
It doesn't matter that sounds aren't against W3C standards, it's not their job to make it illegal for web designers to make pages to annoy users - at this point I would like to ask TE to give my account permission to posts scripts so I can have my sig launch a thousand rickroll popups whenever it is on a page (hey, it's not against W3C standards to do it, so why shouldn't I?) - the fact is, the users don't like it, so you shouldn't do it, let alone force it on them with it being hidden and starting by it's self.

QUOTE Stating yourself "They sure as hell aren't an everyday part of internet life for me." means nothing - you are one user in a world of billions of users. Even if all active members of FAO voted, it is still no where close to an accurate data set given the total number of internet users in the world.[/quote]
Actually, if all of FAO voted, it would be accurate, since they are the target audience of this. (and actually, according to statistics you don't actually need that many random samples to get a good idea of the dirstibution, something like 30 will give you a good idea for something in a small country)

QUOTE (Croc @ Feb 24 2009, 05:17 AM) Sure. Again: ref "it was example code" which I cut/paste from W3C.

Then you made a mistake and people are letting you know you did (you should have made your example more accurate, because at the moment it paints a very bad picture)
QUOTE I personally actually only support autoplay for (tasteful) video eg: mainstream ads that are appropriate to the site, when the sound is auto muted, and the page is properly written (ie: bandwidth connection is detected, browser supported, no pop ups, set cookie etc to not reload again / load different one if already played in the past).[/quote]
So you gave an example of what you wanted to do which is actually something you your self don't like either, but since you've brought up the point, would you be doing bandwidth detection?
(I asusme it's not necessary if the palyer doesn't auto play / automatically start downloading the sound anyway)
QUOTE The idea is always to market, not to force. Opt in instead of opt out as you so aptly put it.[/quote]
which is exactly wnat autoplay+hidden does...
QUOTE I'm personally against a straight link for the general reasons I've stated above (you can't be sure if the site your heading off to is safe, (of course, that's irrelevant in this case as I'm the host in this case, and I'm always happy to have the file vetted by FAO or any of the other sites I work/ed with in similar cases, if it were uploaded to the site/linked from)) and because there is the increased chance that people just won't click on it. While you can lead a horse to water, you can't make it drink. But you can certainly salt it's oats.

An embedded player in the post, next to a "Hear the original audio" comment, not only increases the chance that people will give it a listen/look, but also keeps the user in the site, and doesn't have them heading off elsewhere. It's just how I was taught to write for the web, and it's always seemed (excuse the pun) sound advice. As it is, I've done that (straight link) now in the current Datanet post, and you get a nice white page with just the player You then have to click back to return to the forum, or have opened the link in a new window (not supported with BB as far as I know, but I could well be wrong.)[/quote]
Now this is good jsutificating

Why didn't you say this in your original post instead of asking if you can annoy the hell out of us?

[Tigereye]

QUOTE (madpeople @ Feb 23 2009, 01:32 PM) don't take it personally, TE was simply highlighting that there is no reason for us to post embedded stuff.

To explain about the sounds again, most people listen to music while using the internet (and if they aren't they may be doing so because they don't want sound).
If a webpage starts playing sound that they can't turn off it annoys them and they close that page even if it has useful information on to make it STFU (unless they have vista and can mute the browser independantly, and don't happen to want sound from other pages in it).

The only times a page should make a sound is if it is
a video (like youtube) - you want to hear the sound for the video you chose to play an internet radio station / a embedded music player (like myspace) which you chose to listen to

any sound coming form my web browser which i didn't choose to play results in the page that is playing it getting closed (and if i'm not sure which page it is, I have to close a load of them until I get the right one, and that annoys me as I then have to open them again, and you have then wasted my time)

PM TE what you want to do, but bewarned people will be annoyed if there is some unneeded sound they didn't choose to paly which is just there for "atmosphere".

The only justification for wanting to embed something is if you wanted to put a youtube video (or simlar) in a post

Madpeople summed it up a lot better than my post did.

Sorry - I didn't intend for my words to be taken the way you did. I never once questioned your trustworthiness. I just have a personal hatred of embedded sound and embedded flash.

Back to the point though - your MP3 can easily be linked to in a prominent post for all interested parties to click and listen at their leisure. No need to use FLASH or embed sound into hypertext. Yes it will receive less of an audience that way, but that's the point. If it's force-played on read, many will immediately click "BACK" to stop the sound as they never intended to hear it in the first place. Only those who WANT to hear it will click the link ensuring a 100% satisfaction rate.
When it's embedded, you'll get a large percentage of people who "heard" the sound according to your download statistics, but didn't actually hear the sound according to reality (ie: the insta-closers.)

--TE

[shibbyx1]

Or it could be simple thing under the pic that goes "Click hear to play" and it streams it from there. They do that on the Tripple J down to earth thing, no auto play involved.

~

[MrChaos]

TE and Croc my respect for you has grown heaps