Long story short, I'm developing a theme template for a blog that enables you to view the posts in blocks. The main part of the post is displayed at first, then the secondary content is displayed over that when you hover over the post block.

Everything works fine on a Mac Versions of all major browsers, but start browsing on a PC, and all hell breaks loose when you start trying to display content over Flash Video embeds. The flash element remains visible over the content. It's completely unusable.

From a PC, you can view an example of the problem here: http://photorific.tumblr.com

I'm almost certain this is a bug in the Flash Plugin for Windows, but I was wondering if anyone else had come across this problem before, and if there were any solutions.

This problem has presented itself for a while now and any help would be really, really, really appreciated!

3 answers

This was chosen as the best answer

can you set wmode to 'opaque' or transparent ?

that generally helps.

My test case for content over flash http://www.boldfishclient.co.uk/test/flash/

Answered about 7 years ago by Tony Crockford

Thanks for the quick reply.

First, let me explain the way Tumblr, the theme engine, handles video posts...

The whole embed code is outputted as a single string with the only option being the width of the video... so what I have to do is pass the string to a javascript function, customize some params, and write it to the DOM.

Right now, the script isn't the issue, even besides the fact that, based on your suggestion, I am using it to add the wmode property to the string before I write it. The problem started even without the script, and adding the wmode property didn't help.

I looked into the UFO plugin, but I am not sure it can take a whole string as the parameter. Maybe I can use a match to get the right params and then use the UFO script plugin...

Thanks for the suggestion. Please let me know if you think of anything else.

Answered about 7 years ago by bschaeffer

Scratch that. The javascript function I wrote was testing for the existence of a wmode property in the object string and only adding the opaque parameter if it wasn't there.

It wasn't replacing existing transparent parameters with the new opaque one... so, viola!

I guess opaque is better in this instance than transparent... but thanks a freakin' ton for the suggestion.

Answered about 7 years ago by bschaeffer