Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.
And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.
At the bottom of the body? Are you serious??
See original GitHub issueI’ve just replaced lightbox 2.7.1 with 2.8.2. To start with, I would expect it to be a 100% backward-compatible drop-in replacement that would work out of the box where the previous version used to work, otherwise you should call it 3.x.
Then I found out what the breaking change is:
Include the Javascript at the bottom of your page before the closing
</body>tag:
The old version used to work by placing it in the <head>. Besides the fact that a decently designed script would work either way, having it in <head> is far more elegant and it is the way most modern frameworks and libraries work.
You are going backwards, making things worse rather than better. I’m definitely done with Lightbox.
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 7 years ago
- Reactions:22
- Comments:12 (3 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Top Related Medium Post
Top Related StackOverflow Question
Troubleshoot Live Code
Top Related Reddit Thread
Top Related Hackernoon Post
Top Related Tweet
Top Related Dev.to Post
Top Related Hashnode Post
Of course, since as you say, you were already putting the script at the end of body.
Good for you, but a lot of other people prefer scripts in the
<head>.Actually I’ve never seen a library before that requires you to put it in a specific place.
This is not just about backwards compatibility (which is of course a big deal in itself). Not working unless the library is placed at the end of the body is a bug, whether it affects you in particular or not.
Why would you want to put a non-critical script in the header? it goes against SEO practices, and causes load-blocking so your page is slower. The only benefit to keeping it in the head, other than looking pretty, would be if you are using the defer and async attributes, at which point you would have to wrap it in an on-load function anyway. Which is the entire point of putting it in the body, and at the end. So that it is loaded last when the document is ready. And at the least, your page visibly loads before it starts downloading the addon resource!
I’m sorry but I had to comment, this doesn’t make any sense to me. There are far more critical issues at hand. Not to be dismissive or rude, that’s not my intent - i apologize in advance if it came across that way. I just don’t understand why anyone would want this!! I mean I’ve literally written code to regex process php output in order to get hardcoded head scripts out of there into the body in wordpress due to poor design practices… I can’t imagine actually wanting to put something non critical into it!
We overuse the head these days, and it really should only have minimal css and meta tags, and only ONLY super critical resources, like a raw dump of jquery (so its available instantly, and compressed into the html output). The head should be redefined as “only what is needed to load the above-the-fold page goes here”, where the word “load” has complete separation from “display” when it comes to body contents.
Especially when google, bing, etc require your page to load under 1 second to get a good ranking. Async & footer loading all the way man, hands down.