PDA

View Full Version : colored/custom scrollbars in firefox?



rohis
02-02-2006, 06:05 PM
I use the custom scrollbar color code in my web site http://www.freewebs.com/automata/splash.html

It works on most browsers except firefox. firefox uses a default scroll bar. Is there an additional code or method to change the color for firefox users?... Or should I just tell them to suck it up?

Twey
02-02-2006, 07:39 PM
It works on most browsers except firefox.It doesn't. It works in IE, and possibly Opera. It will probably never be implemented in those browsers that don't currently support it. Although the capability exists in some browsers, it shouldn't be used: the browser chrome was never meant to be touched by web designers.

rohis
02-02-2006, 11:06 PM
Why shouldn't it be used? I've never seen any negative effects or anything

Twey
02-03-2006, 04:46 PM
There are no technical negative effects. However, as I've said above, the scrollbars are part of the browser chrome, which is by rights out of bounds for the web designer, who should keep his/her page design within the specified frame. How would you feel if someone wrote a web page that changed your desktop background so it worked better with that site? To try to interfere with the user's browser colour scheme is intrusive.
Scrollbar colours are also not part of the CSS standard, probably for the reasons I stated above. This means that browser support -- both now and in the future -- will be erratic at best.

rohis
02-05-2006, 07:36 PM
Changing a desktop background isn't really a valid comparison.

Scroll bar colors are very short term and only effect the page with the code on it. Especially considering the web page in question only has a colored scroll bar in an Iframe. I've heard alot more people compliment how nice a website looks with a colored scroll bar than how violated they feel that their scroll bar on one specific page isn't gray. Ya know?

Twey
02-05-2006, 07:53 PM
Changing a desktop background isn't really a valid comparison.A rather extreme one, I'll grant you; but valid, yes.
In any case, it still isn't possible.
I've heard alot more people compliment how nice a website looks with a colored scroll bar than how violated they feel that their scroll bar on one specific page isn't gray.Yes, but it can be unpleasant: if the user is colour-blind, for example, and uses a high-contrast chrome theme, then can't see the scrollbars, it would reflect badly on your site.

rohis
02-05-2006, 08:26 PM
I didn't take into consideration the colorblind... touche'

wiklendt
02-08-2006, 02:19 AM
goodness. if the colour blind person can't see the scroll bar after the web designer changed it to match the colours in the website, what's the chance they'll see the website itself? by reason, then, wouldn't they see nothing at all, let alone the scroll bar?

not to mention there is a varied degree of intensity with colour blindness. some see a spectrum change, others don't see certain colours at either end of the spectrum, some flat out don't see certain colours in the middle of their spectrum itself.

a web designer can't possibly cater for all these possibilities.

am i to understand, me twey that you are so proficient and purist in your code that you cater for the blind? there is code, you know, that certain programs turn the data into speech for the sight impaired. also, there are people who still use IE2, NS2, or 16 color monitors, or 480 x 320 pixel screen resolutions - should us designers make all of our websites black and white default non framed non flashed non coloured non css'd non interesting just so that all people in the world can view it?

besides, it's not just the one scroll bar that's effected in the change of colours, it can sometimes be right inside the site if the designer has chosen to use frames for that site (inline or otherwise). to have a nice lilac and purple colour scheme throughout only to be interrupted by an ugly default coloured scroll bar is almost an insult.

Twey
02-08-2006, 07:43 AM
goodness. if the colour blind person can't see the scroll bar after the web designer changed it to match the colours in the website, what's the chance they'll see the website itself? by reason, then, wouldn't they see nothing at all, let alone the scroll bar?No, the colour-blind would probably have a default stylesheet to override colours he or she couldn't see properly. However, being as these properties aren't part of the CSS specification, they might not be taken into consideration.

a web designer can't possibly cater for all these possibilities.But he/she can at least make an effort.

am i to understand, me twey that you are so proficient and purist in your code that you cater for the blind?Indeed. It's very easy to cater for the blind: simply make sure everything has a text alternative so the screen-reader can read it out for them.

should us designers make all of our websites black and white default non framed non flashed non coloured non css'd non interesting just so that all people in the world can view it?No, it's fine to make flashy sites; but you should provide alternatives for those who can't see all the pretty effects. It's called "degrading gracefully."

besides, it's not just the one scroll bar that's effected in the change of colours, it can sometimes be right inside the site if the designer has chosen to use frames for that site (inline or otherwise). to have a nice lilac and purple colour scheme throughout only to be interrupted by an ugly default coloured scroll bar is almost an insult.That's merely a matter of taste.

spam_banjo
07-06-2007, 05:30 PM
What a strange topic to have been on the verge of an argument over!

Colored scrollbars are fine... providing they are done properly: IE good contrasting colors.

Your argument another example of Political Corectness gone mad.

If I were to be made blind, probably the first thought I would have would be something along the lines of:

"DAMN!! I am not longer able to see things."

not,

"OH NO!!! Now the world has to change around me..!"

It's madness.

Twey
07-06-2007, 06:40 PM
Colored scrollbars are fine... providing they are done properly: IE good contrasting colors.They're still completely non-standard. Moreover, we were talking about colour-blind people, not those who are entirely blind; the colour of the scrollbar would obviously not make a whit of difference to someone who can't see it anyway. The colours that cause a problem are different for different people; there's no way to say which colours are more visible. For example, you may think that red and green contrast rather well, but I had a colour-blind friend who couldn't tell them apart.
Your argument another example of Political Corectness gone mad.Hardly. Taking that tiny bit of effort -- or even, in this case, not taking that tiny bit of effort -- to support another small but considerable section of the population is not, in my opinion, "madness."
If I were to be made blind, probably the first thought I would have would be something along the lines of:

"DAMN!! I am not longer able to see things."

not,

"OH NO!!! Now the world has to change around me..!"Well, you're a nice person, aren't you? :p
Let's take a real-world example. There's a guy in a wheelchair who's trying to get into your shop to buy something, but you don't have a ramp*. Do you a) help him up somehow** or b) say "you have a wheelchair so you should expect not to be able to get into places, go away?"

When it takes so little effort, why is omitting one*** effect for the sake of a fair few people such a problem? The only case in which I can see it being an issue is if the site was written entirely using some plugin or other -- which is one of many reasons why doing so in the first place is a bad idea.

* OK, so accessible web design is actually more like installing the ramp, but the analogy holds.
** A couple of planks of wood?
*** Probably ugly.

spam_banjo
07-08-2007, 04:12 PM
There's a guy in a wheelchair who's trying to get into your shop to buy something, but you don't have a ramp*. Do you a) help him up somehow** or b) say "you have a wheelchair so you should expect not to be able to get into places, go away?"

OK, I see your point. But there has to be a limit.

Would you kick off at a night club owner, who owns a second floor bar, because the wheelchair guy can't get in. No. Therefore if the wheelchair guy wanted a drink, he would have to find another place to go, that catered for people in wheelchairs.

Why should the internet be any different? After all, if the internet were only for playing Quake 2, there would be no problem with accessability but now it is used as the only way to get some information.

If you are supplying required inforamtion such as News, or are an ESSENTIAL service using the internet as your only form of media, you have a responsibility to make your pages accesable. Just like job centers, banks, and other buildings for ESSENTIAL for standard human life. It's just the right thing to do when you are absolutely needed by all.

But there are, and unfortunately, HAVE TO be exceptions to this, as prooved with the second floor nightclub. The wheelchair guy doesn't NEED the nightclub, and although there are clubs who will cater for him, this one is not an option. I'm sure he won't mind! He knows that there are things he can't do, and places he can't go. Some places, standing is the only option.

It's not that I'm a nasty or bad person, and I try my best not to discriminate, but sometimes you just have to be realistic about these things. Unfortunately, any problem you have in your life, is your own. It affects you, and it's down to you to deal with it. If others choose to help, and they will, out of common human decency, it should be, and is appreciated for what it is. Help.

As harsh as it sounds, it's just realistic. I realy don't mean to offend.

Twey
07-08-2007, 04:38 PM
Would you kick off at a night club owner, who owns a second floor bar, because the wheelchair guy can't get in. No. Therefore if the wheelchair guy wanted a drink, he would have to find another place to go, that catered for people in wheelchairs.The difference is that making the night club accessible to the guy in the wheelchair would be nigh on impossible. It may have been a bad decision to situate it on the second floor in the first place; however, there may have been other factors involved -- perhaps it was the only available site?

In conclusion, I think I would say that it is acceptable to knowingly provide (without alternative) a service that is inaccessible to a group of people only if the service cannot be made more accessible. Quake 2, for example, simply could not be made accessible to blind users; thus, nobody will beleaguer the authors for not doing so. Likewise with certain Flash games. There are few forms of information, however, that cannot be made available as text or audio. Certainly they exist, but I've never come across necessary information that couldn't.

spam_banjo
07-08-2007, 07:14 PM
I just don't think the world has a responsibility to the disabled.

Fair enough if people, like myself choose to make inormation accessable, then fair enough... the person giving the info has done their bit to make the world better for all... but he shouldn't feel like he HAS to, unless that information is socially vital.

There have been times where I have spent so long on the look of ther site, that I simply aren't willing to sacrifise looks for functionality. Especially if the only thing making the page look bad, is a big dirty, windows grey scrollbar in the middle of the page (iFrame, obv!).

Image is everything in business, and as sad as it is, again, it's another cruel truth.

I know, I know... iFrames suck balls...! lol But they are sometimes the only option.

Twey
07-08-2007, 07:51 PM
I've never encountered such a case, I must say.
I just don't think the world has a responsibility to the disabled.It's not a responsibility to the disabled so much as plain common sense. You, (or your client) as an author, post(s) material to the web in the hopes that somebody is going to read it. Deliberately cutting down your (or their) target audience is just silly. For example, I could be writing this post in a language I've constructed, but I don't because I know I'd be cutting down my target audience (to a whole two people, in fact).

spam_banjo
07-09-2007, 10:37 AM
Deliberately cutting down your (or their) target audience is just silly.

Like I said, Image is everything. If including the needs of a few hundred visitors... (and I'm not talking about the entire worlds colour-blind population, just the relevant ones, ie: correct city/town/age/cash-flow in the case of the nightclub) ...means that the overall image of my extremely exclusive, and very expensive nightclub's website was diminished, then sorry, but I'd have to go with a flat coloured scrollbar!! Just so that my site looked as sexy, and clean as it could.

It's basicly a case of there being a time and a place for accessibility.

Twey
07-09-2007, 10:45 AM
But the coloured scrollbars only work in IE and Konqueror anyway... a good portion of your visitors (25-45%, depending on who you believe) aren't even going to see them. Is it really worth throwing accessibility away for that?

spam_banjo
07-09-2007, 10:58 AM
a good portion of your visitors (25-45%, depending on who you believe) aren't even going to see them. Is it really worth throwing accessibility away for that?

From the estimated 25-45% (personally I think that's still WAY off), won't be a problem. Their browser won't be affected and therefore there won't be any accessibility issues anyway.

And from what I am seeing, just by personal observations of trends, More than 90% of the people I know on-line use Firefox. The rest use IE. It's quite a lot of people too, from various technical and non-tech backgrounds.

I always support Firefox fully because I use it, and IE for the dummys who don't know any better. I'm confident I'm hitting more than 80% of visitors with that. I'd go as far as to say probably more like 85-90%. But hey... We are never going to know for sure are we?

The rest of them, are using a different browser by choice and are more than aware of the fact that sites probably aren't going to look their best in their lesser-developed browser. Just like the wheelchair guy knows he can't go some places.

djr33
07-09-2007, 11:06 AM
Interesting debate, and amusing.

If you can allow for backwards compatibility, then things should be ok. So, a flash site that has an html backup shouldn't cause much trouble. So, then I don't see why changing the scrollbars is a problem. As long as it doesn't screw up the site in other browsers, at least IE will look a little nicer (assuming it IS nicer, and many sites that do this just become more ugly).

Though it isn't perhaps in the rights of the designer to change the system configuration, IE allows this, and there is no functionality difference for the browsers, just a change in colors. It's not like you're overriding the keyboard, or even the scrolling itself. I dislike automatically scrolling pages much more than I do colored scrollbars.

The argument about the color blind is quite silly, I must admit. I think if possible they should be considered, but there are some faults in your argument, Twey:
1. Color blindness is usually only for part of the spectrum. Though I'm no expert, I'd say that, assuming blue is a color most color blind people can see (and I think it is), blue scroll bars wouldn't hurt anything.
2. The scrollbars aren't defined by colors, but by outlines and differing shades; in fact, just like a blind person's hearing is better, I'd assume that a color blind person can see contrast better than the average person, so they could likely pick out the lines.
3. Though the point might be somewhat true, there may also be a small population of the world that become depressed when they see the color red. Can they help that they become depressed when they see the color red? No. But, are you actually going to avoid red in your design because of it?
4. The scrollbars are the smallest concern in terms of visibility if you are color blind. The background of a page is much more important and perhaps we should only use white, to cater to them.

There's a certain point where catering toward those with disabilities limits the experience for those without. What's the point in trying to fake the 'full experience' for those without, but by doing so limiting that 'full experience' itself?
There was a legal issue in San Francisco (perhaps a wider area; I'm not sure) to outlaw stadium seating in movie theaters because the handicapped couldn't access all of the seats. They could access seats around the perimeter of the seating area, though not up the stairs. So, due to that, they wanted to outlaw it. I love stadium seating. Sure, it's not good for those in wheelchairs, but that's just life. Stadium seating is a cool thing, and so is rock climbing. I don't think either should be disallowed because some people can't participate.

However, the other side of this argument is important to. If you can make it downgrade well, then that's important. As Twey says, making it work for the blind makes sense, since you can do it without making anything in your site worse.

spam_banjo
07-09-2007, 11:17 AM
assuming it IS nicer, and many sites that do this just become more ugly

I think that is perhaps the only reason the colour-blind wouldn't be able to see the bars. Poor contrasting colors. Any good designer knows you need a good color pallet for the site in the first place, with 2 good contrasting colors that work well for readability. If you have a poor selection of colors, your site is always gonna be hard to read & navigate, even with standard scrollbars.

Twey
07-09-2007, 11:26 AM
And from what I am seeing, just by personal observations of trends, More than 90% of the people I know on-line use Firefox. The rest use IE. It's quite a lot of people too, from various technical and non-tech backgrounds.That's mostly because the IE users tend to be people with no technical experience at all who only use their computer for things like checking the weather and playing Solitaire.
If you're right, however, that's 90% of your visitors who won't be able to see the coloured scrollbars anyway. The whole point is looking smaller and smaller.

tech_support
07-09-2007, 11:27 AM
Though it isn't perhaps in the rights of the designer to change the system configuration, IE allows this
IE allows a lot more other things as well... like filters.

If you can't design a page that looks well with standard scrollbars, well... it's best to do your homework.

spam_banjo
07-09-2007, 11:53 AM
If you're right, however, that's 90% of your visitors who won't be able to see the coloured scrollbars anyway. The whole point is looking smaller and smaller.

That's 90% of people I know (EDIT: prolly 80% tech-savvy users)... If I had to guess how many of the total 90% of IE or Fox users were IE... I'd say more than likely the larger portion, prolly 60-70%... as most people don't even realise they CAN have another browser. Some don't even know what a browser is, even though the spend hours looking at Youtube through it!

A "best viewed in IE" logo somewhere prominent lets your viewers know that if they think it looks crappy it probably wont in IE.

Twey
07-09-2007, 12:02 PM
That's 90% of people I know (EDIT: prolly 80% tech-savvy users)... If I had to guess how many of the total 90% of IE or Fox users were IE... I'd say more than likely the larger portion, prolly 60-70%... as most people don't even realise they CAN have another browser. Some don't even know what a browser is, even though the spend hours looking at Youtube through it!I'm more inclined to go with around 60% IE users myself. Nevertheless, that's still around 40% of your visitors who won't see the coloured scrollbars even if you do decide to sacrifice standards-compliance and good design practice to display them to IE users.

spam_banjo
07-09-2007, 12:08 PM
...that's still around 40% of your visitors who won't see the coloured scrollbars even if you do decide to sacrifice standards-compliance and good design practice to display them to IE users.

As opposed to 100% not seeing them if I did.

This debate is actually quite funny, I would personally try to make the site work with the default scrollbars if I used I planned to use iframes. I tend to go with pastel shades so they look fine for me. I'm trying my best to stay with the "You must be accessible" point of view.

I really don't see how using them has any negative effect on your page, aside from the color-blind issue.

spam_banjo
07-09-2007, 12:13 PM
IE allows a lot more other things as well... like filters.

Yeah, and Firefox has PNG support and CSS based Opacity, where as IE NEEDS a filter hack to uses them. Are we supposed to ignore all the latest CSS3 techniques too, just because IE sucks???

I love the idea of Safari 3's RGBA colors, Firefox's Rounded corners, and the ability to make CSS only rollover buttons, but feel pressured to ignore these features because of non-complient browsers.

tech_support
07-09-2007, 12:17 PM
Firefox's Rounded corners
Ehem... What happened to PhotoShop or Gimp

where as IE NEEDS a filter hack to uses them
That's accepted. I'm talking about blur, black and white etc.

and the ability to make CSS only rollover buttons
That's multi-browser compatible, isn't it?

but feel pressured to ignore these features because of non-complient browsers.
Well, don't. Just make it downgrade gracefully.

The main point Twey was trying to point out, that always take accessibility into consideration. Whether it's a small change, or a big site upgrade, it's nice to know that you're counting them in :)

Twey
07-09-2007, 12:32 PM
I really don't see how using them has any negative effect on your page, aside from the color-blind issue.For a start, they're non-standard, and not in the correct format for proprietary CSS properties.
Ehem... What happened to PhotoShop or Gimp [for rounded corners?]Using images for layout features is ugly, and requires a lot of bulk markup. A CSS-based solution is much neater.
[CSS-only rollover buttons are] multi-browser compatible, [aren't they]?Just about. They require possible abuse of the <a> element, though, for IE6 and below.
Well, don't [ignore proprietary features]. Just make it downgrade gracefully.Unfortunately, in cases such as CSS rounded corners, the main advantage provided is simplicity of use. If it's necessary to provide a bulky, complicated, image-based solution anyway, the benefit is mitigated.

spam_banjo
07-09-2007, 12:50 PM
Ehem... What happened to PhotoShop or Gimp

I have only used the rounded corners once in my latest online App. Luckily we are dictating browser, so I felt comfortable using them. I was so surprised how easy they are to implement. And quick too.

Potoshop'd corners are OK, but require skills with slicing graphics that many aren't willing to learn. They are graphics, and therefore increase load times... They look crap while you wait for the images to load... You have to have separate images for each color set... They take 100 times longer (probably an under-estimation) than CSS corners (5-10 mins per set... compared to 2 seconds!!)... need I go on?

chechu
07-09-2007, 12:50 PM
Wow, amazing conversation here !
I must say, I like the changing of scrollbarcolors. Most of the people in Europe still use IE, so they can benefit from the creativity of webmasters.
Anyway, why not do a poll: who uses IE, and who likes changing the scrollbar ?

spam_banjo
07-09-2007, 12:55 PM
10 bonus points to the first person to find an example or BAAAD colors on scrollbars!!! :P

spam_banjo
07-09-2007, 12:59 PM
HAHA!!! I googled "My Homepage"

Fourth result down... Bad bars... (Poor contrast) http://www.charmainlee.co.uk/portfolio/media.html

chechu
07-09-2007, 01:42 PM
Bad bars, great looks...
Let's not make this a chat room ! Initiate a poll to see the opinion of others.

spam_banjo
07-09-2007, 01:54 PM
Bad bars, great looks...
Let's not make this a chat room ! Initiate a poll to see the opinion of others.

KK... Point taken! My bad! ;)

spam_banjo
07-09-2007, 02:13 PM
The main point Twey was trying to point out, that always take accessibility into consideration. Whether it's a small change, or a big site upgrade, it's nice to know that you're counting them in :)

Oh I do, 99% of the time... as I make corporate sites 99% of the time, it's kinda unwritten law to help business' reach as big an audience as possible! If they then want to change this, they can, but I explain why they probably shouldn't.

I do however feel we shouldn't feel pressured let accessibility stop us using new, exciting and exclusive features and techniques. If we did that in the real world (offline), the whole planet would be massively oversized, flat shapes, texture-less, color-less and probably downright miserable!!!

Think how big things would be if EVERYTHING in the world was forced to use accessible text in the way us professional developers will soon be forced to. (Oh the British government is gunning for you, don't you worry boys!)

The best way to explain why I revived this post was because I feel quite strongly that the pressure to make pages accessible is stopping many of us from taking our website designs to the next level... although I'm sure many will argue that the next level *IS* in fact mass accessibility.

We keep getting given new browser features like RGB-Alpha colors... but then don't feel we can use them because of compatibility and now, more importantly, accessibility issues.

Anexxion
03-02-2008, 08:41 PM
im sorry for bumping the oldest thread on the face of the earth, but you realize this shitstorm erupted from a ****ing scrollbar right?

also, www.voi-design.com/contact.php type stuff into the message box, in firefox, look how ugly the scrollbar is, now type it in IE and look how much better it looks, also:

also, lets say you want colored scrollbars in FF:


<style>
body{
scrollbar-face-color: #808080; /*/ obviously change this to whatever you want /*/
scrollbar-arrow-color: #FFFFFF;
scrollbar-highlight-color: #FFFBF0;
scrollbar-3dlight-color: #808080;
scrollbar-shadow-color: #FFFBF0;
scrollbar-darkshadow-color: #808080;
scrollbar-track-color: #CCCCCC;
}
</style>
<script>
function selectCode(f){
document.forms[f].elements[0].focus();
document.forms[f].elements[0].select();
}
function changeScrollbarColor(C){
if (document.all){
document.body.style.scrollbarBaseColor = C
}
}
</script>

no just remove the:


<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

at the top of the page, worked for me

now all your arguments are pointless, dumbasses, seriously.

wiklendt
03-02-2008, 11:38 PM
woohoo!! thanks Anexxion, that's exactly what i needed... a code, not a debate!!

you're a champ! :-D

Anexxion
03-02-2008, 11:58 PM
woohoo!! thanks Anexxion, that's exactly what i needed... a code, not a debate!!

you're a champ! :-D

i hope it does work, thanks,

tech_support
03-03-2008, 04:49 AM
If you want to break your page, remove this:

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
If you don't want to, then just forget about the scrollbars. A page can look great with the standard scrollbars.

If you must, use Flash.

blazai
08-23-2009, 03:04 AM
I"m late to this Thread. But I had to put my 2 cents in.

I would arguue that the majority of users User IE and Firefox. Other browsers are few, fare and in between. IE will never go away due to the corporate use of Microsoft Software. Most corporate environments are forced to use IE, even if they don't want ot.

Most users on the internet are browser, and not technical. So they choose the first option avaibled which is IE. I use both browsers as a developer. I believe all Developers should. As to ensure that you have cross-browser compatibility.

In my opinion Firefox has alot of advantages over IE. IE only has a few advantages over firefox. One being popularity. Most technical people including myself use firefox over IE.

blazai
08-23-2009, 03:27 AM
Anyways, having said all of that. I like custom scrollbars. Great idea!
I would say use them. Custom scrollballs don't harm a browser in anyway.
You can also have an option to turn off custom scroll bars for the users that don't want them.

I do however, disagree with the "color blind" argument. If anything custome scrollbars help color-blind users depending on what colors you use, you can customized a scrollbar that easier for them to see. one could use that as a reason to use scrollbars rather than not use them.

Although flash is great. Too many flash scripts on one page will slow the browser down which is annoying to me.

My theory is... if it can be done without flash... Do it with a simpler script.
I still love flash. It's just not always necessary.

The above code doesn't seem to work in all firefox browsers. Not mine anyway. However. I did find a code, (more javascript of course), that seems to work in all browsers. I'll post it after I troubleshoot the script.

caboose1408
11-16-2009, 06:28 AM
If you want a custom scroll bar that works in every browser.
Go Here (http://www.hesido.com/web.php?page=customscrollbar).

I just Googled it. :D