RE: sending email from metacard
I was trying to do this too. On the 'other' list, there was also a discussion about this and you can download a stack for Mac anyway that actually does this by implementing the SMTP protocol. I glanced at the scripts and it looks a bit complicated. I think the best route to go on the mac might be an applescript using apples own mail app, but of course, one must control that this app will be on the machine of interest. mark mitchell ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
formattedText size?
I asked this on the Rev list, but got no responses. I'm looking for the best way to set the textSize of a field to the maximum size the field can contain without changing the size of the field. So the field should be able to accomodate anything from single words to multiple sentences, all at the max textsize possible. The fields are set to auto-wrap. I have a "repeat until.." script that sortof does the job by first setting the textsize to a way-to-big number (200) then checks the formattedheight and width to see if it exceeds the actual height and width, if it does, it subtracts 5 from the textsize and repeats until it does not. It seems cumbersome...Does anyone have a better way? Am I missing something really simple? (probably). thanks in advance, mark mitchell japan ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
RE: why metacard?
I think I'm stupid. Check that. I know I'm stupid, but I think I've displayed blatantly once again. I just bought Rev. Why? Because I've been a long time hyper/super/meta card user and they had such a good cross-grade deal. I saved 800 bucks. Also, I kinda thought meta and rev were the same company or something. I was under the impression that Meta was being phased out and would soon be replaced by Rev. I once asked on this list what the relationship was, but no one replied or explained. So does Metacard have the same cross-grade deal? If they do, and I had known, I would've gone for meta, because it's tried and true. And as someone mentioned...on all platforms and computers I have tried, it is stable as a rock. I love metacard. When I beta tested Rev, it was of course, very buggy. But I have to say, they did a dynamite job on the interface and cleaining up most of the bugs. It looks beautiful now and for the most part, behaves beautifully. But when it doesn't behave, there is a sly work-around. You can develop in Rev and then open the stack in Metacard (starter kit). Now save. Presto! You have a metacard stack. No need for a standalone. So if you are worried about the stability of your Rev (non-standalone) stacks, I would suggest simply converting them to metacard. mark mitchell Japan ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Re: record sound bug
> amanuensis Signe Marie Sanne wrote: > > On Mac I have found that the corresponding panel is called "Apple > Simple Sound Record Dialog", but I do not know how to open it from > within MC. I'm sure someone must have the right recipe, either using > "GURLGURL", open process, or launch or something, or an Apple Event. > I'm eagerly looking forward to suggestions. Thanks in advance. > -- > You can launch the application "simpleSound" if it is present on the system, but you must then specify "new sound", record the sound, then specify the name and place to save it. i.e. it is fairly labor intensive. So, instead, I have used a dedicated supercard stack which I can then pass all this info on to with a simple copy paste into a supercard field. I can then launch this supercard stack each time from metacard and use this to access the apple record dialog. After using this dialog, it does not ask you to specify the file name and location, as the simple sound dialog does. I do not know if that means it is actually a different dialog, or if that asking behaviour comes from the application 'simplesound'. But you are right, it would be nice if we could access the same dialog direct from metacard. If supercard can do it, surely metacard can too. The dialog is nice as it allows multiple recordings and playbacks before one actually commits to saving anything as a file on the HD. This is, as it turns out, often crucial. mark mitchell ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
record sound bug?
There used to be a "send bug reports to." on this mailing list...but it seems to have disappeared. Anyway, back to the old "record sound" saga... It's great that this has now been implemented in metacard (I've been forced to use weird combinations of superCard/metaCard stacks before this) but I can only get it to work well when using the "with dialog" command...eg. ask file "what" record sound IT with dialog This opens up a dialog stack, which offers all the 'recordFormats()' options, and there are quite a few that sound really good on a Mac (OS 9.1x, Japanese) and take up very little memory space as well. Unfortunately, if you try to record directly in these formats, without going through the dialog, it doesn't sound good anymore. Moreover, the quality level makes no difference. e.g. record sound file it as fl64 with best quality sounds pretty bad, in contrast to the fl64 (floating point 64bit) recorded through the 'dialog', which is crystal clear. I suspect the culprit is in the quality level, which seems to have no effect in the direct (non dialog) script. I suspect that the dialog is recording as 'best' but not the direct script. I wish I could see what the 'sound settings' dialog stack script looks like, but I can't find it. I've tried putting quotes around the quality in the direct script (e.g with "best" quality), but the compiler will not accept this. In summ, can anyone show me a direct recording script for any format which sounds really good on the Mac? Or is there something broken here that might ought to be fixed (my opinion). I don't want to have to go through the dialog each time. Thanks! mark mitchell ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
Players vs Play
Scott Rossi wrote: If you're simply trying to "pause" your script until the player is done, you > can use "wait with messages" and query the paused state of the player. For > example: > > on playMyStuff > # my code here > # more code here > start player myPlayer > wait until the paused of player myPlayer with messages > # yet more code here > end playMyStuff Thank you Scott! That's exactly what I was looking for. I have been unaware of the 'paused' property and instead have been trying to use 'playstopped' message, which is not fun. Well, this does make life easier. And the verdict? The same stack with some 200 aiff audio files is 23 MB; converted to MP3 and using player objects this is now 15 MB. That's a nice savings and its nice to know that the audio files are now in a format that is sure to be supported on any machine. Thanks again. mark mitchell japan ___ metacard mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
players versus play
I'm trying to convert to using player objects, rather than the "play"
command, as suggested in the reference manual. This also would allow me
to switch to mpeg layger 3 for my audio files, and save considerable
space ("play" does not work for mp3 files, it seems). But I cannot
figure out an easy way to do the
--wait until sound() is "done"
using the player objects. The playStopped message is sent to the player
object itself. I've thus tried making a function handler in the card
script, which responds to a message passed by the player object and then
returns "stopped" or something, and then calling this function in the
actual handler scripts where I want the wait to occur...but whew! It
didn't seem to work and there has gotta be a better way!
Anyway, any help would be muchly appreciated.
mark mitchell
japan
___
metacard mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
