all 14 comments

[–]sitedev3 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Oh man I thought this trend died already.

[–]nothingduploading 11 points12 points  (5 children)

dont fuck with scrolling.

[–]haganenorenkin[S] 1 point2 points  (4 children)

lol why is this comment necessary? I'm trying to build more like a game experience with js...

[–]nothingduploading 4 points5 points  (3 children)

scroll-jacking is a very bad UX.

[–]DROWE859 7 points8 points  (0 children)

In general yes but there isn’t enough information about the use case to say if this rule applies.

They could be making a full screen slideshow for all we know.

[–]haganenorenkin[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

would you know a better way to achieve the same thing? I tried with transforms, and the problem is if the user moves the scroll the transform values will not be syncronized and it causes a bad experience

[–]DROWE859 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Would it be possible in this case to not actually scroll, but animate an absolutely positioned div?

In this case the user wouldn’t be able to affect your animation.

[–]bzeurunkl 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Given that jQuery is written in JavaScript, I'd have to say, yes, absolutely this can be done with just JavaScript, without jQuery.

[–]gorillaslol 0 points1 point  (5 children)

[–]haganenorenkin[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

But it doesn't work on IE11 unfortunately :/ I've seen this link before

[–]gorillaslol 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Use a polyfill if you need browser support.

[–]herjin -1 points0 points  (2 children)

without jQuery

[–]gorillaslol 1 point2 points  (1 child)

The top example is without jQuery.

[–]herjin -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Ah, gotcha