1 Correct answer
Hi @Vincent16B6,
The question is do you want to learn something or do you just want fast & easy?
The best way to learn is to code manually in DW with HTML, CSS and JavaScript (see the how-to instructions below).
https://www.w3schools.com/howto/howto_js_slideshow.asp
If you just want fast & easy, use a widget like this one from Wow Slider (license required for commercial use).
https://wowslider.com/demos.html
Hope that helps.
13
Replies
For me any new project you want to try to move on from jQuery (Despite how much I have loved jQuery over the years) and go more native JS as much as you can as a goal for websites and any web based application solutions something like vue.js and react,
By @Liam Dilley
I totally agree. I dont think we need jQuery anymore BUT vanilla javascript needs to keep on improving. You can't deny that adding fadeIn(), fadeOut() jQuery functions were super easy as was selecting an element $('.myElement') as opposed to document.querySelector('.myElement'), yes there is a way to shorten 'document.querySelector' but I rarely see any developers using it.
The way I see it, is you either hate the extra baggage which libraries bring along or you can live with it, in which case jQuery is still ok to use for those kinds of developers. What I find funny is those developers using other extra baggage workflows and then hate on jQuery, the 'pot calling the kettle black'.
The OP said he's not a coder. So I take that to mean, he's not interested in learning plain vanilla JS, vue.js, react.js or any other framework du jour.
You dont have to be a coder to search the internet for simple slideshows created using vanilla javascript.......no-one has to learn anything, apart from copying and pasting. I think as 'professionals' we should be providing advice based on what direction the industry seems to be moving and our own opinions.
You can argue that you would continue to use jQuery or Bootstrap, whereas others would frown upon it and suggest something different based on their opinion, of course.
Liam and I were providng advice based on our overview and understanding on where things are heading in terms of jQuery v vanilla javascript
OP chose #2 the path of least resistance. There is nothing more to say.
So if I advised someone to use tables for layout because it's the path of least resistance that's ok? Sure sucks that you would consider yourself a 'professional' and not at least recognise that jQuery is something that most forward looking developers are distancing themselves from. Especially it sucks if the OP is not using the jQuery library for doing anything else but run a simple slideshow..........humm. Still I guess I should expect it after-all, it is the DW forum, mostly mickey mouse users now the program has decsended into that space.
What I do is NOT the issue. If the OP prefers to use a widget, who are we to question it? It's not our project and thus not our problem. There's no point in beating a dead topic to death if the OP is not open to it which is what's happening right now. 'Nuff said!
By @Nancy OShea
The way I see it regular forum contributors have a responsibilty to depart information that is current rather than what the OP might or might not be capable of using, even IF the user then decides to ignore the advice provided. Its usually sensible to have 4 tyres attached to your car, a good motor mechanic would advise you do so but if you then choose to ignore that advice that's up to you.
Even if the OP doesnt take onboard the advice, someone else who possibly comes across the post may have a better understanding of what they are about to deploy if someone else has responded with their opinions about using a particular workflow that has been suggested.
Its not wrong it just allows those with less experience to make a better judgement as to which option they want to follow, occasionally we do have some interested forum users, who want to do things using the best solutions.
AdChoices