icon_kid - 4:39 am on Oct 15, 2013 (gmt 0)
Great stuff, swa66 -- amazing versatility in CSS.
Tonight I had to skim through your very comprehensive reply because my time is short right now. I'll study it and try your code samples on the weekend. Much of it just looks like a cleaner way to achieve the design I want. The nature or the 'utility' of the icons is only to mark a spot on the map. Unlike Google Maps, I won't need my 'map markers' to be clickable. Also unlike Google Maps, I don't need to have any of them overlap, so any extra coding having to do with "stacking" them in some order for 'Z' values can be dispensed with.
Bear in mind that not only do I want to position the icons, but they must also be subjected to the "swap code" -- which you could think of as the prime feature of this whole project. The impetus for this project came when I decided to make a Google Map for my dispatcher and then realized that it wouldn't be nearly as handy as it could be for his needs because of one simple limitation -- a dispatcher needs to be able to hide map markers. As a matter of fact, he doesn't want to see ANY markers untill he starts routing out 'way stops.' In Google Maps you can NOT make a marker disappear except by deleting it (and its 'way stop') completely. Someone in this forum has said that a marker "hide" feature is available in some advanced version of Google Maps but I've already looked into that and have found no evidence that such a feature is present in it. So when I see that something I want doesn't yet exist, but I think I can make it myself, then I'll give it a try -- a Google-looking map with map markers that can individually appear and dissapear using checkboxes. The dissapearing act is accomplished by swapping an opaque image with a fully transparent one. A theorectically simpler method previously attempted was a 'hide' script (to display a single image or not to display it) which was tried, failed and abandoned. So, as long as I can position icons and also swap them with another image then this new CSS strategy will work out for me. The issue of "sprites" is interesting. I'll have to go back and look at what the difference is between a sprite (as used in a Web page) and say a normal PNG image. I know about sprites as a CGI animator, where a sprite is usually just a small, low-res, low-depth 2D image which, because of its small file size, can be processed more swiftly for rendering in a 3D enviornment where action is taking place -- can't imagine why something like a sprite would be used in a Web page, which is usually a static, 2D world.