RE: Tri-state checkboxes
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 11:30:04 -0800, Mark Powell wrote: > Ken: > > Sounds promising. Is the size/location of the underlying checkbox > predictable enough for this? i.e. it doesn't pixel-creep from platform > to platform? Good question - I'm not sure, but I know it is at least consisitent within its platform. You may end up needing to create one equivocal image for each platform, in which case, the covering "image" would probably be a button with the icon set to the proper platform's equivocal image. I'd think you'd have to play around with it to see if there's any "pixel-creep", but you could make up for it by adjusting the image that's being put into the equivocal button (i.e. if you need the image to go down and to the left one pixel, you can add an empty pixel column on the left of the image, and an empty pixel row on the top of the image). Ken Ray Sons of Thunder Software, Inc. Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web Site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/ ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Tri-state checkboxes
Another option would be to use a Custom Property set to keep track of which image to display. On openstack, determine the system type and set the custom prop set appropriately. Thanks, Brent Anderson Christa McAuliffe Space Education Center On Feb 23, 2007, at 11:37 AM, Ken Ray wrote: On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 09:22:33 -0800, Mark Powell wrote: Thanks to all for your suggestions, but they do not precisely fit what I need. The image solutions assume one look-and-feel...if the standalone were to be run on Vista, for example, the image would have the wrong motif when compared to the neighboring conventional checkboxes. And Stephen's solution uses disabled as the third state, which is not what I need. I need an enabled third state. I am guessing this is not possible, but any other ideas are greatly appreciated. Well, the closest you can get is to have a single image that shows the equivocal state that is put on top of a real checkbox, and is hidden. When the user clicks on the checkbox, you check the current state of the hilite and if it is true (checked), you show the equivocal image on top and allow the mouseup to continue (which will change the checkbox to cleared (unchecked), but beneath the equivocal image. Then when the user clicks on the image, you have script that simply hides the image. Then to find out the "state" of the checkbox, you'd just check the visible of the image - if it's showing, you're in an equivocal state; if not, you take the hilite of the checkbox. HTH, Ken Ray Sons of Thunder Software, Inc. Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web Site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/ ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
RE: Tri-state checkboxes
Ken: Sounds promising. Is the size/location of the underlying checkbox predictable enough for this? i.e. it doesn't pixel-creep from platform to platform? Mark Well, the closest you can get is to have a single image that shows the equivocal state that is put on top of a real checkbox, and is hidden. When the user clicks on the checkbox, you check the current state of the hilite and if it is true (checked), you show the equivocal image on top and allow the mouseup to continue (which will change the checkbox to cleared (unchecked), but beneath the equivocal image. Then when the user clicks on the image, you have script that simply hides the image. Then to find out the "state" of the checkbox, you'd just check the visible of the image - if it's showing, you're in an equivocal state; if not, you take the hilite of the checkbox. ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
RE: Tri-state checkboxes
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 09:22:33 -0800, Mark Powell wrote: > Thanks to all for your suggestions, but they do not precisely fit what I > need. > > The image solutions assume one look-and-feel...if the standalone were to > be run on Vista, for example, the image would have the wrong motif when > compared to the neighboring conventional checkboxes. And Stephen's > solution uses disabled as the third state, which is not what I need. I > need an enabled third state. > > I am guessing this is not possible, but any other ideas are greatly > appreciated. Well, the closest you can get is to have a single image that shows the equivocal state that is put on top of a real checkbox, and is hidden. When the user clicks on the checkbox, you check the current state of the hilite and if it is true (checked), you show the equivocal image on top and allow the mouseup to continue (which will change the checkbox to cleared (unchecked), but beneath the equivocal image. Then when the user clicks on the image, you have script that simply hides the image. Then to find out the "state" of the checkbox, you'd just check the visible of the image - if it's showing, you're in an equivocal state; if not, you take the hilite of the checkbox. HTH, Ken Ray Sons of Thunder Software, Inc. Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web Site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/ ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Tri-state checkboxes
Hi, Just change the "look and feel" depending on the platform, e.g. use one set of images for Mac and another for Windows etc. All the Best Dave On 23 Feb 2007, at 17:22, Mark Powell wrote: Thanks to all for your suggestions, but they do not precisely fit what I need. The image solutions assume one look-and-feel...if the standalone were to be run on Vista, for example, the image would have the wrong motif when compared to the neighboring conventional checkboxes. And Stephen's solution uses disabled as the third state, which is not what I need. I need an enabled third state. I am guessing this is not possible, but any other ideas are greatly appreciated. Mark On 23 Feb 2007, at 14:01, Mark Powell wrote: I know there is debate among HIF designers that such a thing should exist in the first place, but let's assume that one has a good reason for it: My question is, is there any Rev-native way of doing tri-state checkboxes? Where a checkbox can have an ON, OFF, or "equivocal" setting that signifies something between ON and OFF. If not Rev- native, has anyone cooked up their own solution whose look and feel is cross-platform compatible (so that the tri-state checkbox can be ganged alongside conventional Rev-native checkboxes, and not stand out like a sore thumb)? I am on 2.8.0 Mark ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
RE: Tri-state checkboxes
Thanks to all for your suggestions, but they do not precisely fit what I need. The image solutions assume one look-and-feel...if the standalone were to be run on Vista, for example, the image would have the wrong motif when compared to the neighboring conventional checkboxes. And Stephen's solution uses disabled as the third state, which is not what I need. I need an enabled third state. I am guessing this is not possible, but any other ideas are greatly appreciated. Mark On 23 Feb 2007, at 14:01, Mark Powell wrote: > I know there is debate among HIF designers that such a thing should > exist in the first place, but let's assume that one has a good reason > for it: > > My question is, is there any Rev-native way of doing tri-state > checkboxes? Where a checkbox can have an ON, OFF, or "equivocal" > setting that signifies something between ON and OFF. If not Rev- > native, has anyone cooked up their own solution whose look and feel is > cross-platform compatible (so that the tri-state checkbox can be > ganged alongside conventional Rev-native checkboxes, and not stand out > like a sore thumb)? > > I am on 2.8.0 > > Mark > ___ > use-revolution mailing list > use-revolution@lists.runrev.com > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your > subscription preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Tri-state checkboxes
Check out my Tri State Checkbox I just whipped up. It uses disabled as a third state. (I know, I know, the HIG...) but it's pretty intuitive. revonline: barncard category: programming nameTri State Checkbox -- stephen barncard s a n f r a n c i s c o - - - - - - - - - - - - ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Tri-state checkboxes
Hi, Just create a small image and set the contents depending on the state which you keep in a Custom Property. Something like this would do it: on mouseUp local myCurrentState put the cpCurrentState of me into myCurrentState if myCurrentState = empty then put 0 into myCurrentState end if add 1 to myCurrentState if myState > 3 then put 1 into myState end if switch myCurrentState case 1 set the fileName of me to "File1" break case 2 set the fileName of me to "File2" break case 3 set the fileName of me to "File3" break end switch set cpCurrentState of me to myCurrentState end mouseUp Of course you don't need to use an image file you could just use an Icon, but this should serve as a basis. Hope this Helps All the Best Dave On 23 Feb 2007, at 14:01, Mark Powell wrote: I know there is debate among HIF designers that such a thing should exist in the first place, but let's assume that one has a good reason for it: My question is, is there any Rev-native way of doing tri-state checkboxes? Where a checkbox can have an ON, OFF, or "equivocal" setting that signifies something between ON and OFF. If not Rev- native, has anyone cooked up their own solution whose look and feel is cross-platform compatible (so that the tri-state checkbox can be ganged alongside conventional Rev-native checkboxes, and not stand out like a sore thumb)? I am on 2.8.0 Mark ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Re: Tri-state checkboxes
Mark, use an image, every mouseUp you cycle thru the three stages and change the image. I think it is the easiest way. Andre On Feb 23, 2007, at 12:01 PM, Mark Powell wrote: I know there is debate among HIF designers that such a thing should exist in the first place, but let's assume that one has a good reason for it: My question is, is there any Rev-native way of doing tri-state checkboxes? Where a checkbox can have an ON, OFF, or "equivocal" setting that signifies something between ON and OFF. If not Rev- native, has anyone cooked up their own solution whose look and feel is cross-platform compatible (so that the tri-state checkbox can be ganged alongside conventional Rev-native checkboxes, and not stand out like a sore thumb)? I am on 2.8.0 Mark ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
Tri-state checkboxes
I know there is debate among HIF designers that such a thing should exist in the first place, but let's assume that one has a good reason for it: My question is, is there any Rev-native way of doing tri-state checkboxes? Where a checkbox can have an ON, OFF, or "equivocal" setting that signifies something between ON and OFF. If not Rev-native, has anyone cooked up their own solution whose look and feel is cross-platform compatible (so that the tri-state checkbox can be ganged alongside conventional Rev-native checkboxes, and not stand out like a sore thumb)? I am on 2.8.0 Mark ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
