Re: Search Many Docs to Return Search Results
Sivakatirswami, Have you put together what you need or are you still looking for some ideas? Mike --- On Sat, 5/15/10, Sivakatirswami ka...@hindu.org wrote: From: Sivakatirswami ka...@hindu.org Subject: Search Many Docs to Return Search Results To: How to use Revolution use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Date: Saturday, May 15, 2010, 1:57 PM I feel like I'm about to reinvent the wheel here... and I believe I even posted this query once before but am having trouble finding the emails where some good souls responded previously Can anyone who has created any search-many-docs scripts post their library or scripts for returning search results? or point to a stack online that has contains scripts that will serve? We want to the user to enter a term... Rev will dig a number of html files. Not many, so, we will just read them from disk. The search engine will step through the documents and return a list of hits. We retrieve the entire line using lineoffset and move on to the next instance in the same doc. Then proceed to the next file. For display we want to show the user about 100 chars before and after the term found and then post this to a search results field, where she can see the results, hover over the small excerpt will pop up the whole line-paragraph, and a click will open the document (set the html text of a field to the doc) and take her to that place in the document. I have parts of the above here and there in various stacks, especially the last part I have some code that steps through a field and sets the highlight color of the search term and the user can quickly scan and see his term in color... and I think I can put it together, but... I'm guessing many of you already have various flavors of this scenario already built and much better coded than I could do. so, if anyone has any snippets for any part of the above scenario I can put them together with what I have. Thanks! Sivakatirswami ___ 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
Search Many Docs to Return Search Results
I feel like I'm about to reinvent the wheel here... and I believe I even posted this query once before but am having trouble finding the emails where some good souls responded previously Can anyone who has created any search-many-docs scripts post their library or scripts for returning search results? or point to a stack online that has contains scripts that will serve? We want to the user to enter a term... Rev will dig a number of html files. Not many, so, we will just read them from disk. The search engine will step through the documents and return a list of hits. We retrieve the entire line using lineoffset and move on to the next instance in the same doc. Then proceed to the next file. For display we want to show the user about 100 chars before and after the term found and then post this to a search results field, where she can see the results, hover over the small excerpt will pop up the whole line-paragraph, and a click will open the document (set the html text of a field to the doc) and take her to that place in the document. I have parts of the above here and there in various stacks, especially the last part I have some code that steps through a field and sets the highlight color of the search term and the user can quickly scan and see his term in color... and I think I can put it together, but... I'm guessing many of you already have various flavors of this scenario already built and much better coded than I could do. so, if anyone has any snippets for any part of the above scenario I can put them together with what I have. Thanks! Sivakatirswami ___ 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: [ANN] tRev Gets Better PDF Docs, Enhanced Scratch Pad Editing (video)
Kay, Go to http://reveditor.com and click on the Quickstart link on the right side of the page. I don't know what link you are using, but I did have to change the URL once last week. Your page may need refreshing. You can also go to the docs from the help menu in the latest tRev. Best, Jerry Daniels The latest Rev Editor Video: http://reveditor.com/write-your-own-plugins-for-trev On Jan 25, 2010, at 10:19 PM, Kay C Lan wrote: Hi Jerry, followed the iWork link and got: Enter your Apple ID and password to view this document. Your Apple ID must be entered in lowercase. Document doesn't exist. Document password is incorrect, or the document is no longer available. Continue The document you requested doesn't exist or is no longer active. H, and that's really interesting. I just copied and pasted the dialog text from the iWork site to here so I'd get the text absolutely correct, yet on the dialog I can see only the first and last line above, the bit in the middle magically appeared when I pasted into here. Outcome is the same though, I can't check out your new and improved pdfs. Thanks On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 1:45 AM, Jerry Daniels jerry.dani...@me.com wrote: tRev users, We have just updated the documentation for tRev to accomodate the new Scratch Pad feature with its new window style and multi-instance architecture. Here's the link to a page with links to the Quickstart guide and the Shortcuts. http://reveditor.com/trev-quickstart-shortcuts-now-on-iworkcom These nice little PDFs are hosted on iWork.com and view really well, let you download them or print them. Best of all, there is no log-in of any sort required. We've also enhanced the Scratch Pad editing process so that it's done directly--without the inconvenience of a separate editor. I have a super-short video showing how to edit and annotate your links in the Scratch Pad. Here's the link: http://reveditor.com/scratch-pad-enhancement Best, Jerry Daniels The latest Rev Editor Video: http://reveditor.com/scratch-pad-links-to-your-fav-handlers ___ 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: [ANN] tRev Gets Better PDF Docs, Enhanced Scratch Pad Editing (video)
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 10:25 PM, Jerry Daniels jerry.dani...@me.comwrote: Kay, I don't know what link you are using,... On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 1:45 AM, Jerry Daniels jerry.dani...@me.com wrote: tRev users, Here's the link to a page with links to the Quickstart guide and the Shortcuts. http://reveditor.com/trev-quickstart-shortcuts-now-on-iworkcom Jerry, In your original post you had a link back to you 12Jan10 Blog. In the body were 3 links, Quickstart and Keyboard shortcuts (Win and Mac). I didn't try the other two, but he Quickstart one failed and still fails. Fortunately your suggested alternative links work fine. Thanks :-) ___ 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: [ANN] tRev Gets Better PDF Docs, Enhanced Scratch Pad Editing (video)
Hi Jerry, followed the iWork link and got: Enter your Apple ID and password to view this document. Your Apple ID must be entered in lowercase. Document doesn't exist. Document password is incorrect, or the document is no longer available. Continue The document you requested doesn't exist or is no longer active. H, and that's really interesting. I just copied and pasted the dialog text from the iWork site to here so I'd get the text absolutely correct, yet on the dialog I can see only the first and last line above, the bit in the middle magically appeared when I pasted into here. Outcome is the same though, I can't check out your new and improved pdfs. Thanks On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 1:45 AM, Jerry Daniels jerry.dani...@me.com wrote: tRev users, We have just updated the documentation for tRev to accomodate the new Scratch Pad feature with its new window style and multi-instance architecture. Here's the link to a page with links to the Quickstart guide and the Shortcuts. http://reveditor.com/trev-quickstart-shortcuts-now-on-iworkcom These nice little PDFs are hosted on iWork.com and view really well, let you download them or print them. Best of all, there is no log-in of any sort required. We've also enhanced the Scratch Pad editing process so that it's done directly--without the inconvenience of a separate editor. I have a super-short video showing how to edit and annotate your links in the Scratch Pad. Here's the link: http://reveditor.com/scratch-pad-enhancement Best, Jerry Daniels The latest Rev Editor Video: http://reveditor.com/scratch-pad-links-to-your-fav-handlers ___ 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: [ANN] tRev Gets Better PDF Docs, Enhanced Scratch Pad Editing (video)
OK, that's even weirder. Prior to hitting the Send button my reply had nothing in it about: Enter your Apple ID and password to view this document. Yet another line that just magically appeared. Weird. So, just to clarify. I followed the link in your email to your blog page. From there I followed the Quickstart link to the iWork.com page. At that point I got a simple webpage that stated (and this time I'll type it myself): Document doesn't exist. The document your requested doesn't exist or is no longer active. There were no buttons, no login prompts (I do have an Apple ID), nothing but simple text and an apple logo at the bottom. This was in Firefox. I just tried in Safari and it's basically the same, although Safari had the waterwheel cursor (the one you get on intial startup or shutdown) for about 5 seconds, under the Document doesn't exist line before coming up with the last line about no longer active. HTH On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 12:19 PM, Kay C Lan lan.kc.macm...@gmail.comwrote: Hi Jerry, followed the iWork link and got: Enter your Apple ID and password to view this document. Your Apple ID must be entered in lowercase. Document doesn't exist. Document password is incorrect, or the document is no longer available. Continue The document you requested doesn't exist or is no longer active. H, and that's really interesting. I just copied and pasted the dialog text from the iWork site to here so I'd get the text absolutely correct, yet on the dialog I can see only the first and last line above, the bit in the middle magically appeared when I pasted into here. Outcome is the same though, I can't check out your new and improved pdfs. Thanks On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 1:45 AM, Jerry Daniels jerry.dani...@me.comwrote: tRev users, We have just updated the documentation for tRev to accomodate the new Scratch Pad feature with its new window style and multi-instance architecture. Here's the link to a page with links to the Quickstart guide and the Shortcuts. http://reveditor.com/trev-quickstart-shortcuts-now-on-iworkcom These nice little PDFs are hosted on iWork.com and view really well, let you download them or print them. Best of all, there is no log-in of any sort required. We've also enhanced the Scratch Pad editing process so that it's done directly--without the inconvenience of a separate editor. I have a super-short video showing how to edit and annotate your links in the Scratch Pad. Here's the link: http://reveditor.com/scratch-pad-enhancement Best, Jerry Daniels The latest Rev Editor Video: http://reveditor.com/scratch-pad-links-to-your-fav-handlers ___ 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: ON-Rev Docs (was Re: Getting user's time from web revlet?)
stephen barncard stephenrevoluti...@barncard.com wrote: When is Revolution going to [snip] +1 What about The Missing Manual for On-Rev ? ;-) ___ 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
constant in the docs
Hi, the built in dictionary and also the online dictionary shows the following last sentence Tip: To see a list of built-in constants, open the Documentation window, click Revolution Dictionary, and choose Constants from the menu at the top of the window Does anyone know, what Documentation windows and what menu i shall open? Is this an error in the docs? Regards, Matthias ___ 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: constant in the docs
Dictionary in the toolbar , Language:Constants - Stephen Barncard San Francisco http://houseofcubes.com/disco.irev 2010/1/20 runrev260...@m-r-d.de Hi, the built in dictionary and also the online dictionary shows the following last sentence Tip: To see a list of built-in constants, open the Documentation window, click Revolution Dictionary, and choose Constants from the menu at the top of the window Does anyone know, what Documentation windows and what menu i shall open? Is this an error in the docs? Regards, Matthias ___ 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: constant in the docs
Hi Matthias, Yes, that's old and obsolete. Instead, open the dictionary. I have it disaply in column lay-out (see preferences). In the most left column, there is a list starting with All, followeed by Library, Object and Language. If you open the Language branch, you will see an item Constant. Click on it and you will see almost all of the constants that are available. I believe that a few constants are missing. -- Best regards, Mark Schonewille Economy-x-Talk Consulting and Software Engineering Homepage: http://economy-x-talk.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/xtalkprogrammer TwistAWord supports Haiti. Buy a license for this word game at http://www.twistaword.net and support the earthquake victims. Op 20 jan 2010, om 18:05 heeft runrev260...@m-r-d.de het volgende geschreven: Hi, the built in dictionary and also the online dictionary shows the following last sentence Tip: To see a list of built-in constants, open the Documentation window, click Revolution Dictionary, and choose Constants from the menu at the top of the window Does anyone know, what Documentation windows and what menu i shall open? Is this an error in the docs? Regards, Matthias ___ 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-2: constant in the docs
Stephen, Mark, thanks. Sometimes i do not see the wood for the trees. Regards, Matthias ___ 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: constant in the docs
using 4.0: put the constantNames into fld 1 --- On Wed, 1/20/10, Mark Schonewille m.schonewi...@economy-x-talk.com wrote: From: Mark Schonewille m.schonewi...@economy-x-talk.com Subject: Re: constant in the docs To: How to use Revolution use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Date: Wednesday, January 20, 2010, 11:14 AM Hi Matthias, Yes, that's old and obsolete. Instead, open the dictionary. I have it disaply in column lay-out (see preferences). In the most left column, there is a list starting with All, followeed by Library, Object and Language. If you open the Language branch, you will see an item Constant. Click on it and you will see almost all of the constants that are available. I believe that a few constants are missing. -- Best regards, Mark Schonewille Economy-x-Talk Consulting and Software Engineering Homepage: http://economy-x-talk.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/xtalkprogrammer TwistAWord supports Haiti. Buy a license for this word game at http://www.twistaword.net and support the earthquake victims. Op 20 jan 2010, om 18:05 heeft runrev260...@m-r-d.de het volgende geschreven: Hi, the built in dictionary and also the online dictionary shows the following last sentence Tip: To see a list of built-in constants, open the Documentation window, click Revolution Dictionary, and choose Constants from the menu at the top of the window Does anyone know, what Documentation windows and what menu i shall open? Is this an error in the docs? Regards, Matthias ___ 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 __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.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: Re-2: constant in the docs
I miss stuff all the time. you are not alone - Stephen Barncard San Francisco http://houseofcubes.com/disco.irev 2010/1/20 runrev260...@m-r-d.de Stephen, Mark, thanks. Sometimes i do not see the wood for the trees. Regards, Matthias ___ 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
ON-Rev Docs (was Re: Getting user's time from web revlet?)
Sadly, ON-REV ENGINE NOTES [ LAST UPDATED 2009-06-02 BY Mark Waddingham ]
is the ONLY full reference sheet on ON-Rev. (why? have they slowed up on
development?) I was just going to re-post it.
When is Revolution going to {
1. Show some other features promised for On-Rev (like stacks and/or GETPROP
ability so we can rewrite some desktop scripts that use custom properties?
2. Print some decent, searchable, and fully complete docs on the service?
3. Make this tech available to other ISP hosts like Dreamhost?
}
then there is the additional information below that was sent out a while ago
(by email) for some new features. This info is not available anywhere online
except Nabble.
The errormode property is especially helpful.
Here's where to download the iRev clients:
-snip---
* Mac OS X: http://www.on-rev.com/templates/onrev/files/onrevosx.dmg
* Windows: http://www.on-rev.com/templates/onrev/files/onrevwindows.exe
New Features:
new errormode property which specifies how error messages are handled
inline: display errors html formatted within page output
stderr: errors are not displayed but will appear in server error logs
quiet: no error display
New $_POST_RAW variable
Fixes:
include of empty file name no longer outputs spurious characters, now
throws an appropriate error (bad filename)
engine crash when setting http headers
PATH_TRANSLATED now contains the path to the running script file when the
requested url contains extra path info after the script path
PATH_INFO contains the extra path info
-snip---
-
Stephen Barncard
San Francisco
http://houseofcubes.com/disco.irev
2010/1/18 Ralf Bitter ra...@dimensionb.de
Hi Mike,
you can get infos about the $_SERVER variable here:
http://samples.on-rev.com/irev-engine-notes.txt
Ralf
On 18.01.2010, at 16:55, Michael Kann wrote:
While perusing the revIngniter docs I came across the sentence:
The On-Rev server is currently not supporting the $_Server variable
HTTP_ACCEPT_CHARSET, so this function returns FALSE on this server.
---
Is there a list someplace of the server variables which the On-Rev server
supports? (I assume that would be the same list that you can use in your
.irev pages?)
Thanks again,
Mike
___
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
[ANN] tRev Gets Better PDF Docs, Enhanced Scratch Pad Editing (video)
tRev users, We have just updated the documentation for tRev to accomodate the new Scratch Pad feature with its new window style and multi-instance architecture. Here's the link to a page with links to the Quickstart guide and the Shortcuts. http://reveditor.com/trev-quickstart-shortcuts-now-on-iworkcom These nice little PDFs are hosted on iWork.com and view really well, let you download them or print them. Best of all, there is no log-in of any sort required. We've also enhanced the Scratch Pad editing process so that it's done directly--without the inconvenience of a separate editor. I have a super-short video showing how to edit and annotate your links in the Scratch Pad. Here's the link: http://reveditor.com/scratch-pad-enhancement Best, Jerry Daniels The latest Rev Editor Video: http://reveditor.com/scratch-pad-links-to-your-fav-handlers ___ 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
Technical docs for maintenance of apps ?
Hi list, Just curious : how do you guys handle technical docs for your apps (mostly for maintenance) in case of complex algorithms and/or architecture ? Fos instance, I have a cgi script (triggered by a rev client app) that is used once a day to update a DB, and it also outputs a text file that contains javascript variables structured as xml (this file is then used / imported by various web pages as part of the javascript needed to work properly). Furthermore, the (large) xml data are structured in a very efficient way to reduce its size for faster download and faster use inside those webpages... All this stuff is quite fast and efficient, but frankly I wonder if I'll be able to remember every detail in 6 months... So the question is : is there any efficient way to describe all these multi-level tasks / fine-tuning of scripts and data for further maintenance ? Thanks, JB ___ 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
Available: 4 sets of 2.0 docs
Dear List Folks, We've been doing a bit of a clear out in our cupboards, and we have found 4 sets of brand new, shrinkwrapped and boxed version 2.0 Manuals for Revolution. It seems a pity to throw them out, so if anyone is interested in owning these lovely and historic items, just drop me a line (offlist) and we'll ship them out to you for just the cost of postage to wherever you are. Each package contains the 2.0 User Guide, and the complete Language Reference for 2.0. Obviously, Revolution has moved on a bit, but much of this information will still be useful, especially the language terms won't have changed all that much. Or, if you are still using an older copy of Revolution, it could be just what you need. Perhaps you'd just like to put them on your shelf as a piece of history.. or they'd make great doorstops. Whatever you'd like to do with them, we hate to throw anything away so let me know if you'd like them - first come, first served. Be warned, they are heavy. Postage to Outer Cambodia could be substantial. Warm Regards, Heather Heather Nagey Customer Services Manager Runtime Revolution Ltd http://www.runrev.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: Absolute File Paths - Bug or bad Docs
On Sep 24, 2008, at 7:53 PM, Kay C Lan wrote: On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 7:25 AM, Bob Sneidar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I thought that if you wanted to refer to an absolute path in unix you would use /volumes/Macintosh HD/Applications. This is of course for the Mac OS. Perhaps other Unix variants use something else for the mount points besides volumes, but the idea is the same. Sorry, you mean OSX not Mac OS 9. I've just checked, my reference to the HD being partitioned is incorrect, well only slightly if you consider a normal HD is a single partition. On OSX for an absolute path you can use either /volumes/mac hd/Applications or /Applications - but you can't use /mac hd/Applications. What is important is that both what the Docs say, and the examples they give are incorrect for OSX, but as Sarah has pointed out they are correct if you are dealing with the old Classic Mac OS. No idea for Win or Linux. It's not surprising that the examples in the docs are correct if you are working in the Mac Classic environment, since, to my knowledge, RunRev (or at least Jeanne DeVoto, who wrote the first version of the docs) was working primarily in the Mac OS classic environment at the time the docs were first written. I'll admit, this threw me for a loop when I first switched over to OS X. I couldn't for the life of me figure out why my file paths didn't work, until I figured out the Unix/OS X convention of / referring to the boot volume. For an introduction to file paths, written for beginning Rev coders, see http://revolution.byu.edu/extfiles/exFiles.php I've tried here to distill my sometimes painfully-acquired knowledge to help my students avoid the pitfalls I encountered as a noobie. As always, if anyone comes across inaccuracies, I'd love to get feedback. Regards, Devin Devin Asay Humanities Technology and Research Support Center Brigham Young University ___ 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: Absolute File Paths - Bug or bad Docs
Devin Asay wrote: It's not surprising that the examples in the docs are correct if you are working in the Mac Classic environment, since, to my knowledge, RunRev (or at least Jeanne DeVoto, who wrote the first version of the docs) was working primarily in the Mac OS classic environment at the time the docs were first written. I'll admit, this threw me for a loop when I first switched over to OS X. Me too. It's a good thing Apple has such a loyal following, given their disregard for backward compatibility. As for Rev, it seems that entry could use an updated example, ditching the Classic example in favor of one for the only currently-supported Mac OS, and update the description as well. Has anyone here submitted that request to the RQQC? -- Richard Gaskin Managing Editor, revJournal ___ Rev tips, tutorials and more: http://www.revJournal.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: Absolute File Paths - Bug or bad Docs
On Sep 25, 2008, at 9:51 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: Devin Asay wrote: It's not surprising that the examples in the docs are correct if you are working in the Mac Classic environment, since, to my knowledge, RunRev (or at least Jeanne DeVoto, who wrote the first version of the docs) was working primarily in the Mac OS classic environment at the time the docs were first written. I'll admit, this threw me for a loop when I first switched over to OS X. Me too. It's a good thing Apple has such a loyal following, given their disregard for backward compatibility. As for Rev, it seems that entry could use an updated example, ditching the Classic example in favor of one for the only currently-supported Mac OS, and update the description as well. Has anyone here submitted that request to the RQQC? Done. http://quality.runrev.com/qacenter/show_bug.cgi?id=7214 Devin Devin Asay Humanities Technology and Research Support Center Brigham Young University ___ 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: Absolute File Paths - Bug or bad Docs
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 12:30 AM, Devin Asay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Has anyone here submitted that request to the RQQC? Done. http://quality.runrev.com/qacenter/show_bug.cgi?id=7214 Thanks Devin. As usual I've been away from the Revolution as my Boss incongruously expects me to work at my day job. ;-) Just trying to catch up on few list posts now before it's back to the grindstone. ___ 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: Absolute File Paths - Bug or bad Docs
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 3:57 PM, Kay C Lan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The docs, for 'absolute file path': The full name and location of a file, beginning with the disk the file is on, including The 'Tip' for defaultFolder includes the above plus points out that UNIX naming convention is used so the path MUST begin with and folders separated by /. The example under 'defaultFolder' is: set the defaultFolder to /Hard Disk/Applications/GetIt All simple enough. But when I do: answer files Select a file with /Mac HD/Users/kcl/stacks/ titled Choose a stack I end up in the bowels of the Rev App bundle. Even if I do the above in the message box it ends up in the Rev App bundle. BUT, if I remove the reference to the hard disc everything works fine, both in my stack and the msg box. This applies whether I'm looking in Users, Applications, System... everywhere. Referring to the HD or partition fails to lead anywhere other than the bowels of the Rev App Bundle So has something changed in Rev 3.0 or have the Docs been wrong all this time? The docs are out of date at least as far as OS X is concerned. The hard disk name had to be specified when using Mac OS 9 or less, but under OS X, you have to use the Unix type file name where the hard drive is left off. For your example, try this: answer files Select a file with /Users/kcl/stacks/ titled Choose a stack But, if you are using a networked or removable drive, then you have to specify the name of the drive, prefaced with /Volumes e.g. /Volumes/Backup HD/Docs The final problem is if you need to send the path to an AppleScript routine. AppleScript clings to the old style and would use: Mac HD:Users:kcl:stacks: But you can do the conversions back forth using the revMacFromUnixPath and revUnixFromMacPath functions. BTW, I don't understand how specifying the drive name gets you into the bowels, but perhaps it just uses the initial defaultFolder since the specified folder does not really exist. Cheers, Sarah ___ 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: Absolute File Paths - Bug or bad Docs
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 5:27 PM, Sarah Reichelt [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: The docs are out of date at least as far as OS X is concerned. The hard disk name had to be specified when using Mac OS 9 or less, but under OS X, you have to use the Unix type file name where the hard drive is left off. Thanks for confirming this. But, if you are using a networked or removable drive, then you have to specify the name of the drive, prefaced with /Volumes e.g. /Volumes/Backup HD/Docs I think there is a third 'exception'. If you have partitioned your boot HD. Whilst tracking this down I noticed that in an earlier version of my stack it included /Volumes/partition name/folder/folder2/etc and it had been working correctly on a lone Mac with a partitioned boot drive. Thanks ___ 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: Absolute File Paths - Bug or bad Docs
I was not aware that you included a / before the hard drive. / Applications means root of the System drive/Applications folder. I thought that if you wanted to refer to an absolute path in unix you would use /volumes/Macintosh HD/Applications. This is of course for the Mac OS. Perhaps other Unix variants use something else for the mount points besides volumes, but the idea is the same. Bob Sneidar IT Manager Logos Management Calvary Chapel CM On Sep 23, 2008, at 10:57 PM, Kay C Lan wrote: The docs, for 'absolute file path': The full name and location of a file, beginning with the disk the file is on, including The 'Tip' for defaultFolder includes the above plus points out that UNIX naming convention is used so the path MUST begin with and folders separated by /. The example under 'defaultFolder' is: set the defaultFolder to /Hard Disk/Applications/GetIt All simple enough. But when I do: answer files Select a file with /Mac HD/Users/kcl/stacks/ titled Choose a stack I end up in the bowels of the Rev App bundle. Even if I do the above in the message box it ends up in the Rev App bundle. BUT, if I remove the reference to the hard disc everything works fine, both in my stack and the msg box. This applies whether I'm looking in Users, Applications, System... everywhere. Referring to the HD or partition fails to lead anywhere other than the bowels of the Rev App Bundle So has something changed in Rev 3.0 or have the Docs been wrong all this time? MacBook Pro OSX 10.5.5 Rev Studio 3.0.0 build 750 Brain old and tired ___ 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: Absolute File Paths - Bug or bad Docs
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 7:25 AM, Bob Sneidar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I thought that if you wanted to refer to an absolute path in unix you would use /volumes/Macintosh HD/Applications. This is of course for the Mac OS. Perhaps other Unix variants use something else for the mount points besides volumes, but the idea is the same. Sorry, you mean OSX not Mac OS 9. I've just checked, my reference to the HD being partitioned is incorrect, well only slightly if you consider a normal HD is a single partition. On OSX for an absolute path you can use either /volumes/mac hd/Applications or /Applications - but you can't use /mac hd/Applications. What is important is that both what the Docs say, and the examples they give are incorrect for OSX, but as Sarah has pointed out they are correct if you are dealing with the old Classic Mac OS. No idea for Win or Linux. Just thought this would have been picked up earlier - I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed;-) ___ 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: Absolute File Paths - Bug or bad Docs
Wait, You have a shed! Tom McGrath On Sep 24, 2008, at 9:53 PM, Kay C Lan wrote: Sorry, you mean OSX not Mac OS 9. I've just checked, my reference to the HD being partitioned is incorrect, well only slightly if you consider a normal HD is a single partition. On OSX for an absolute path you can use either /volumes/mac hd/Applications or /Applications - but you can't use /mac hd/Applications. What is important is that both what the Docs say, and the examples they give are incorrect for OSX, but as Sarah has pointed out they are correct if you are dealing with the old Classic Mac OS. No idea for Win or Linux. Just thought this would have been picked up earlier - I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed;-) ___ 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
Absolute File Paths - Bug or bad Docs
The docs, for 'absolute file path': The full name and location of a file, beginning with the disk the file is on, including The 'Tip' for defaultFolder includes the above plus points out that UNIX naming convention is used so the path MUST begin with and folders separated by /. The example under 'defaultFolder' is: set the defaultFolder to /Hard Disk/Applications/GetIt All simple enough. But when I do: answer files Select a file with /Mac HD/Users/kcl/stacks/ titled Choose a stack I end up in the bowels of the Rev App bundle. Even if I do the above in the message box it ends up in the Rev App bundle. BUT, if I remove the reference to the hard disc everything works fine, both in my stack and the msg box. This applies whether I'm looking in Users, Applications, System... everywhere. Referring to the HD or partition fails to lead anywhere other than the bowels of the Rev App Bundle So has something changed in Rev 3.0 or have the Docs been wrong all this time? MacBook Pro OSX 10.5.5 Rev Studio 3.0.0 build 750 Brain old and tired ___ 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: AnimationEngine docs fixes and restored eBook download
Hi Malte, Thanks for the updates to AnimationEngine you provided in July. I tried them out the day I received them and everything is working great. I am really interested in the drawIsoBox. It draws a Bar Chart in isometric view. Is it possible to use drawIsoBox or a different example to draw a bar chart not displayed in isometric view. I would like to draw charts for different types of graphs like Bar, Pie and Line. thanks, -=JB=- On Jul 30, 2008, at 5:49 PM, Malte Brill wrote: Hi, sorry for the delay. You can download the fixed documentation for animationEngine here: http://www.derbrill.de/downloads/animationengine29.zip The examples for drawIsoLine and drawIsoBox are working now. Also the download for the eBook has been restored. It can be found on the animationEngine download pages: http://www.runrev.com/downloads/all-downloads/animation-engine/ The updated documentation version should be on RRs Servers later this week I hope. In the meantime please grab it from my download pages. Again, my excuses for the delay. All the best, Malte ___ 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: AnimationEngine docs fixes and restored eBook download
Just to let you folks know I read and care. ;-) JB, I sent you a mail off list. All the best, Malte ___ 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
AnimationEngine docs fixes and restored eBook download
Hi, sorry for the delay. You can download the fixed documentation for animationEngine here: http://www.derbrill.de/downloads/animationengine29.zip The examples for drawIsoLine and drawIsoBox are working now. Also the download for the eBook has been restored. It can be found on the animationEngine download pages: http://www.runrev.com/downloads/all-downloads/animation-engine/ The updated documentation version should be on RRs Servers later this week I hope. In the meantime please grab it from my download pages. Again, my excuses for the delay. All the best, Malte ___ 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: [DOCs] Missing Newsletter Archives
On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 11:46 AM, Bill Marriott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The newsletter archive/index has been updated Excellent, thanks. ___ 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: [DOCs] Missing Newsletter Archives
The newsletter archive/index has been updated ___ 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: [DOCs] Missing Newsletter Archives
Kay, Anyone shed some light on where the 'missing' newsletters are? Basically the last 6 months of 2007. I clicked on the 'Newsletter Archive' link at the bottom of the latest issue #41 and was taken to a page which had editions #1 - #27, but where are #28 The index of newsletters is behind several months. You can manually figure out the URL of any given newsletter http://www.runrev.com/newsletter/[month]/issue[number]/ for example, http://www.runrev.com/newsletter/january/issue41/ but obviously that's a real pain in the neck. We're working on the website and you should see some improvement soon. - Bill ___ 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: [DOCs] Missing Newsletter Archives
Hi, if you need the missing ones, just let me know, i can send them to you. Regards, Mathias Original Message Subject: [DOCs] Missing Newsletter Archives (27-Jan-2008 6:40) From:Kay C Lan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Anyone shed some light on where the 'missing' newsletters are? Basically the last 6 months of 2007. I clicked on the 'Newsletter Archive' link at the bottom of the latest issue #41 and was taken to a page which had editions #1 - #27, but where are #28 - #40? Thanks ___ 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 To: use-revolution@lists.runrev.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: [DOCs] Missing Newsletter Archives
Hi, here are the links to the missing ones http://www.runrev.com/newsletter/may/issue27/index.php?id=n48671474 http://www.runrev.com/newsletter/july/issue28/index.php?id=iksmw90896 http://www.runrev.com/newsletter/july/issue29/index.php?id=thxdw632083 http://www.runrev.com/newsletter/august/issue30/index.php?id=DTHIM47023 http://www.runrev.com/newsletter/august/issue31/index.php?id=FDTHA632423 http://www.runrev.com/newsletter/september/issue32/index.php?id=GGESX624006 http://www.runrev.com/newsletter/september/issue33/index.php?id=NWLLP432737 http://www.runrev.com/newsletter/october/issue34/index.php?id=NWSSA424227Writinghttp://www.runrev.com/newsletter/october/issue35/index.php?id=NWSIW432980New http://www.runrev.com/newsletter/november/issue36/index.php?id=NSQQX424514 http://www.runrev.com/newsletter/november/issue37/index.php?id=NSZTU433427 http://www.runrev.com/newsletter/november/issue38/index.php?id=NWSPL424723 http://www.runrev.com/newsletter/december/issue39/index.php?id=UTCSM433888 http://www.runrev.com/newsletter/december/issue40/index.php?id=KNUVY434061 Regards, Matthisa Original Message Subject: [DOCs] Missing Newsletter Archives (27-Jan-2008 6:40) From:Kay C Lan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Anyone shed some light on where the 'missing' newsletters are? Basically the last 6 months of 2007. I clicked on the 'Newsletter Archive' link at the bottom of the latest issue #41 and was taken to a page which had editions #1 - #27, but where are #28 - #40? Thanks ___ 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 To: use-revolution@lists.runrev.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
[DOCs] Missing Newsletter Archives
Anyone shed some light on where the 'missing' newsletters are? Basically the last 6 months of 2007. I clicked on the 'Newsletter Archive' link at the bottom of the latest issue #41 and was taken to a page which had editions #1 - #27, but where are #28 - #40? Thanks ___ 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: docs
On Jan 21, 2008, at 1:45 PM, Josh Mellicker wrote: Hi Mark, If you're referring to the docs at revcoders.org, I have been discussing this with the Rev folks and I think we all figured it would be best to wait until the next big doc revision came out, which should be soon I believe. Yes, thanks for the update. ___ 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: docs
Hi Mark, If you're referring to the docs at revcoders.org, I have been discussing this with the Rev folks and I think we all figured it would be best to wait until the next big doc revision came out, which should be soon I believe. On Jan 19, 2008, at 12:17 PM, Mark Swindell wrote: What became of the web-based project that seemed to be gaining a bit of traction a 3 or 4 months ago? Mark On Jan 19, 2008, at 12:05 AM, Peter Alcibiades wrote: I guess no-one is very interested in it, but I still believe it would be a huge asset to promoting the platform if it existed. Peter ___ 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
docs
Ken, I think I know what he means. You are starting out learning Rev, and you have a problem of some sort that goes beyond the tutorial materials and whose solution is going to involve using a bunch of different features in the correct way together. Lets say its my own case: this large file that I'm trying to do a nice report from, but it could be anything. You simply do not know what to start to think of using. As soon as someone says to you, use X Y Z, its almost not a problem any more, because the dictionary entries about them, if you know they are what you need, will let you figure out how to use them. But without knowing this, you end up searching for things that sound like they may be relevant, but each time you find one, you have no idea whether it is, or which option on it it. For instance, Jim Ault a while back suggested using filter for one of my tasks. I'd never thought of it. Maybe stupid, but hadn't. As soon as I know to use that, the problem is over and the docs are perfect. Before that, I have to go through, find filter, read all the options, realize its the thing that's needed... But I'm doing this along with reading about find, match, offset, if, switch, repeat, arrays, custom properties, a whole bunch of stuff, and without even knowing whether one of them in combination with something else will do what's needed. You'd get in the same situation with Linux or Unix if all you had was the Man pages on commands.But fortunately we have the cookbooks, like Carla's, which go the reverse way: here is a problem, here is step by step the various things you use. I guess no-one is very interested in it, but I still believe it would be a huge asset to promoting the platform if it existed. Peter ___ 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: docs
What became of the web-based project that seemed to be gaining a bit of traction a 3 or 4 months ago? Mark On Jan 19, 2008, at 12:05 AM, Peter Alcibiades wrote: I guess no-one is very interested in it, but I still believe it would be a huge asset to promoting the platform if it existed. Peter ___ 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
Why not a Wiki? (was Re: docs)
I understand exactly what you are talking about. A couple of years ago, before I bought Revolution, when I was a DreamCard user, I was experiencing exactly what you described in your full post- namely just not knowing where to look. Thankfully, I discovered this list. I usually try and search the list archives before I post a question- hence I lurk a lot and don't post much. However, I still think that an active Wiki produced by the brilliant minds that always seem to have solutions and share them via this list would be an amazing resource that would benefit everyone tremendously. When I lobbied for it in the past, it seemed that the biggest barrier for most folks was not wanting to learn Wiki syntax in order to be able to post content. It seemed like the 2nd biggest barrier was deciding where/how to host it. I would love to see it happen, but for the time being it seems like my list of runrev bookmarks to sites like Sons of Thunder, So Smart Software, HyperActive, and this list are the best resources. While I would like to have it all in one place and would like to spend less time searching the list archives and reading posts, I don't see it happening anytime soon. Unfortunately. --- Peter Alcibiades [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You'd get in the same situation with Linux or Unix if all you had was the Man pages on commands.But fortunately we have the cookbooks, like Carla's, which go the reverse way: here is a problem, here is step by step the various things you use. I guess no-one is very interested in it, but I still believe it would be a huge asset to promoting the platform if it existed. Peter ___ 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 Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping ___ 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: docs
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 20:57:00 -0800, Randall Lee Reetz wrote: I cant speak for runrev but supercard docs leave the user reverse enginering for dollars. Sorry, Randall, but I don't understand what you mean by this... can you clarify? (Just trying to understand the phrase reverse engineering for dollars...) 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: docs
I agree. And this wiki-revdocs would realy add value to the product, but what i was really talking to was the guts, the latin, of the interprter, how and why and when the great Oz pulls his levers. Reading the great books on hypercard and you began to undeestand the mind of god. maybe this said more about the profound elegance of the hypercard kernal, but knowing the interpretor meant knowing how to write scripts and build stacks. -Original Message- From: Peter Alcibiades [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: How to use Revolution use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Sent: 1/16/2008 10:56 PM Subject: docs supercard docs leave the user reverse enginering for dollars Yes. Yes, so true. The problem is not with the existing docs, which are just fine for what they do. The problem, for people learning it, is that they are like a cookbook all about ingredients but with no recipes for dishes. Its like trying to find how to make apple pie from a book which has very fine informative entries for apple, pastry, sugar - but no entry for pie. What you need when you are learning however is a cookbook that starts from tasks. The great Carla Schroder's Linux Cookbook is a fine example. By the time I have learned Rev properly, if I am spared that long, I'll have personally written one in the form of notes on topics encountered as problems to solve, and so will many of us. It would be a great collaborative project were something like this to be done right. It would probably make a significant contribution to Rev's success and adoption if there were one available. If everyone on the group just contributed one a month, it would be a fantastic resource, and would grow to a respectable size very fast. I'd be happy to help. Not with writing recipes (which might be a bit of a disaster) but with editing and so on. Revolution Recipes. It has a nice ring to it? Peter ___ 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: docs
On Jan 16, 2008, at 11:56 PM, Peter Alcibiades wrote: supercard docs leave the user reverse enginering for dollars Yes. Yes, so true. The problem is not with the existing docs, which are just fine for what they do. The problem, for people learning it, is that they are like a cookbook all about ingredients but with no recipes for dishes. Its like trying to find how to make apple pie from a book which has very fine informative entries for apple, pastry, sugar - but no entry for pie. What you need when you are learning however is a cookbook that starts from tasks. The great Carla Schroder's Linux Cookbook is a fine example. Just to remind everyone--there is a fine cookbook of recipes included in the Rev documentation, albeit easily overlooked. Just open Documentation Getting Started, then choose Sample Projects or Sample Scripts. This is not an exhaustive list, but does give a good taste of how things are done in Rev. These recipes are also searchable using the Search feature of the Documentation (Thanks, Eric!) Search also lets you search the mail list archives and several key web sites maintained by Rev developers. The Search feature is under-promoted and so often overlooked. It has saved my bacon many times. By the time I have learned Rev properly, if I am spared that long, I'll have personally written one in the form of notes on topics encountered as problems to solve, and so will many of us. It would be a great collaborative project were something like this to be done right. It would probably make a significant contribution to Rev's success and adoption if there were one available. If everyone on the group just contributed one a month, it would be a fantastic resource, and would grow to a respectable size very fast. I'd be happy to help. Not with writing recipes (which might be a bit of a disaster) but with editing and so on. Revolution Recipes. It has a nice ring to it? See comments above. :-) Devin Devin Asay Humanities Technology and Research Support Center Brigham Young University ___ 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: docs
Hi Devin, Le 17 janv. 08 à 17:17, Devin Asay a écrit : These recipes are also searchable using the Search feature of the Documentation (Thanks, Eric!) Search also lets you search the mail list archives and several key web sites maintained by Rev developers. The Search feature is under-promoted and so often overlooked. It has saved my bacon many times. Thanks for the kind word :-) This Search Engine is under-promoted: yes :-( And it has many unknown features: For instance, it is able to display stacks uploaded to RevOnline for a week or a month. This should prevent many to ask 'where is this stack?' on the list :-) Talking of which, it allows also to subscribe/unsubscribe to any Rev list, find the definition of 'FTP', revise operator precedence and so much more. I wanted it to be a Swiss knife: probably too much blades without making any hole in your pocket ;-) Best regards from Paris, Eric Chatonet. Plugins and tutorials for Revolution: http://www.sosmartsoftware.com/ Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ___ 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
docs
Someone mentioned one of the great hypercard books... Made me wish as much of the inner workings of modern xtalk environments were as transparently explained by the developers themselves. I cant spealpk for runrev but supercard docs leave the user reverse enginering for dollars. randall ___ 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
docs
supercard docs leave the user reverse enginering for dollars Yes. Yes, so true. The problem is not with the existing docs, which are just fine for what they do. The problem, for people learning it, is that they are like a cookbook all about ingredients but with no recipes for dishes. Its like trying to find how to make apple pie from a book which has very fine informative entries for apple, pastry, sugar - but no entry for pie. What you need when you are learning however is a cookbook that starts from tasks. The great Carla Schroder's Linux Cookbook is a fine example. By the time I have learned Rev properly, if I am spared that long, I'll have personally written one in the form of notes on topics encountered as problems to solve, and so will many of us. It would be a great collaborative project were something like this to be done right. It would probably make a significant contribution to Rev's success and adoption if there were one available. If everyone on the group just contributed one a month, it would be a fantastic resource, and would grow to a respectable size very fast. I'd be happy to help. Not with writing recipes (which might be a bit of a disaster) but with editing and so on. Revolution Recipes. It has a nice ring to it? Peter ___ 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
[DOCs] Split and Combine - a Scripting Challenge?
OK, let's just say I'm a sceptic. Not a full card carrying member of Sceptics Dot Org, but enough to annoy my wife;-) For reason that may become apparent in a couple of days, I'm looking at the Rev Docs and notice that for the itemDelimiter I can use a single character. Although it doesn't say it specifically, it would imply a numToChar up to 255. Interestingly, although you get the error: 'Error description: Chunk: source is not a number' if you try to: set the itemDelimiter to kk You DON'T get an error if you try set the itemDelimiter to numToChar(666) [assuming you've NOT set useUnicode to true] The catch is that it doesn't actually set the itemDelimiter to a numToChar greater than 255, but sets it to the 'first' char of the two byte char. This can be mathematically calculated by subtracting, 256,512,1024, etc until it gets below 256, in the above case it would be charToNum(154). This is easy to demonstrate by pasting the following into the msg box: set the itemDelimiter to numToChar(666) put charToNum(the itemDelimiter) into msg Substitute any number for 666, even if it's a number beyond the 65535 normal unicode limit, Rev still sets it to a char below 256. Interestingly, if you do 'set the useUnicode to true' then you will end up with an error message. But that is not the reason for this ramble. No the reason for this ramble is that the Rev Docs say that for Split and Combine the character used must be in the ASCII range, 1 to 127; and that's what I've been working on for ages. But the sceptic in me just wanted to see what happens if I do use something outside that range. My initial 'crude manual' tests indicated that there was actually no problem with Split or Combine using a character up to 255. So I set about writing a more robust 'automatic' test. Here's what I came up with: [commented numbers are explained below] - repeat with x = 128 to 255 --1 set the itemDelimiter to numToChar(x) --2 repeat with y = 1 to 100 repeat with z = 1 to 5 put numToChar(x-y-z) into char z of item y of tStartList end repeat end repeat put tStartList into tArray --3 split tArray by itemDelimiter --4 repeat with y = 1 to 100 put tArray[y] into item y of tEndList end repeat --5 if (tEndList tStartList) then answer Split failed with char: numToChar(x) titled Failed put tEndList cr tStartList into msg exit to top else --put tEndList cr tStartList cr into msg end if --6 combine tArray by itemDelimiter --7 repeat for each item tItem in tArray if (tItem is not among the items of tStartList) then answer Combine failed with char: numToChar(x) titled Failed put tItem is not amoung tStartList into msg exit to top else --put tItem combine checks OK into msg end if end repeat end repeat --8 put Everything Checked OK! into msg - --1 Set the itemDelimiter to a char greater than 127 --2 create a 100 item list. Initially each item was a single character, and to ensure no conflict with the itemDelimiter char, was simply x-y Just for the sake of it I then decided to make the items 5 char 'words', so added the x-y-z repeat loop. As a matter of interest, the x-y version runs in a blink of the eye, the x-y-z version takes a second or two. --3 create an array with Split using a character above 127 --4 Because Combine doesn't build a list in any specific order, rebuild the list in the exact order it was created. --5 Compare the StartList with the EndList and if they are not the same pop up a dialog. If you 'uncomment' the put line you can watch the script run, but it adds significantly to the time taken to complete. --6 Now Combine the array, again using a char outside the allowed range. --7 A simple check, if each item in the new list is in StartList. Again report if it isn't and again, if you uncomment the put line you can watch the script run and add much much more time to the running of the script. --8 If it gets to here then what came Out must be what went In so using a char from 128 to 255 doesn't seem to cause an error. Anyone like to point out the error in my logic? Or write a more robust test that supports the limit in the Docs? This was tested on an Intel Mac, OSX 10.4.9, Rev 2.8.1 build 472 NOTE: I'm NOT advocating the use of chars above 127 for Split or Combine!! This is purely for the 'enjoyment' of developing a script that tests a multitude of cases to see if an error occurs:-) ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
On 23 May 2007, at 09:17, Ian Wood wrote: Obviously this isn't a problem for images that have been 'saved as' with the EXIF data stripped out because they will have a new valid creation date being new files, but people do it to original files as well (or copies if they know what's good for them...). Not exactly what you are looking for perhaps, but you might find this interesting... You can shell mdfind mdls via a Rev application and get lots of info *if* the metadata is available. I used Rev to grab this metadata from an image Cloe's camera took. Ummm... she's never set the date/time in the camera - /Users/jimsims/Pictures/images_/sims_Rome.JPG - AcquisitionMake = FUJIFILM AcquisitionModel= FinePix F10 Aperture= 4.6 AttributeChangeDate = 2007-03-21 07:08:12 +0100 BitsPerSample = 32 ColorSpace = RGB ContentCreationDate = 1904-01-01 01:00:00 +0100 ContentModificationDate = 2006-05-26 02:53:17 +0200 ContentType = public.jpeg ContentTypeTree = (public.jpeg, public.image, public.data, public.item, public.content) Creator = Digital Camera FinePix F10 Ver1.02 DisplayName = sims_Rome.JPG EXIFVersion = 2.2 ExposureMode= 0 ExposureTimeSeconds = 0.001818182 FlashOnOff = 1 FocalLength = 8 ContentChangeDate = 2006-05-26 02:53:17 +0200 CreationDate = 2006-05-26 02:53:17 +0200 CreatorCode = 0 FinderFlags = 0 Invisible = 0 IsExtensionHidden = 0 Label = 0 Name = sims_Rome.JPG NodeCount = 0 OwnerGroupID = 501 OwnerUserID = 501 Size = 1635497 TypeCode = 0 HasAlphaChannel = 0 ID = 5352438 Kind= JPEG Image LastUsedDate= 2007-03-21 07:08:12 +0100 Orientation = 1 PixelHeight = 2136 PixelWidth = 2848 RedEyeOnOff = 0 ResolutionHeightDPI = 72 ResolutionWidthDPI = 72 UsedDates = ( 2006-05-26 02:53:17 +0200, 2006-06-05 02:00:00 +0200, 2006-06-06 02:00:00 +0200, 2007-03-21 01:00:00 +0100 ) WhiteBalance= 0 Jim Sims Custom Software Development www.EZPZapps.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: Error in docs about file creation date
Wilhelm Sanke wrote: On Wed, 23 May 2007,Richard Gaskin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Right now Rev uses the OS APIs to get the file info, so it's about as efficient as it can be. I can see the benefit of using EXIF, but since this requires additional work and processing time, and only applies to a subset of a very small number of file tyes, this sounds like an excellent candidate for an external. Anyone here interested in writing it? -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Media Corporation I do not know if he is interested and would have the time, but I think Alex Tweedly, author of the wonderful libEXIF stack, would be the ideal candidate. I'd certainly be interested. I *should* have time. I have tried to tweak his stack a little to retrieve the original dates from all image files of a folder. Execution time per image file is from 13 to 40 milliseconds depending on what amount of date I get from the original date line of Alex's variable alltags (i.e. only the original date or with filename and/or seconds etc.). I left the stack script intact and edited only the test button to get only the original-date lines. This means that the stack - as before - first retrieves *all* EXIF data in the stack script before only the date line is accessed from the changed button script. Would Alex rewrite his stack script to concentrate on the original date, I believe the execution speed per image file would be only about 5 milliseconds or even less. An external based on his algorithms would surely be astonishingly fast. I'll have a look at it, probably over the weekend. I haven't actually looked at the EXIF stack for quite a while, so it will be interesting to see just how poor my code documentation was :-) -- Alex. ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
On Wed, 23 May 2007,Richard Gaskin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Right now Rev uses the OS APIs to get the file info, so it's about as efficient as it can be. I can see the benefit of using EXIF, but since this requires additional work and processing time, and only applies to a subset of a very small number of file tyes, this sounds like an excellent candidate for an external. Anyone here interested in writing it? -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Media Corporation I do not know if he is interested and would have the time, but I think Alex Tweedly, author of the wonderful libEXIF stack, would be the ideal candidate. I have tried to tweak his stack a little to retrieve the original dates from all image files of a folder. Execution time per image file is from 13 to 40 milliseconds depending on what amount of date I get from the original date line of Alex's variable alltags (i.e. only the original date or with filename and/or seconds etc.). I left the stack script intact and edited only the test button to get only the original-date lines. This means that the stack - as before - first retrieves *all* EXIF data in the stack script before only the date line is accessed from the changed button script. Would Alex rewrite his stack script to concentrate on the original date, I believe the execution speed per image file would be only about 5 milliseconds or even less. An external based on his algorithms would surely be astonishingly fast. Best regards, Wilhelm Sanke http://www.sanke.org/MetaMedia ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
On 22 May 2007, at 23:30, Wilhelm Sanke wrote: These are indeed valid arguments that have to be considered . As far as I know, however, the situation may be at least different for Windows and MacOS. I do not know if the OSX finder could access EXIF data automatically, but WindowsXP surely does. The EXIF creation date of a camera image is automatically read by WindowsXP, as can be seen in the file information when you configure the folder setting accordingly. So there would be no slowdown of any kind when incorporating this information in the detailed files. I am not really sure what the OSX finder does. If in fact it should be able to access such data, then I would repeat my recommendation for the detailed files. 'Get Info' in the Finder (at least on 10.4.9) shows the manufacturer, model, colour space, profile, focal length and shutter speed for images with EXIF info. Spotlight allows you to search by lots of other EXIF tags, although I've not seen an EXIF creation date in the list. However, you can *never* assume that EXIF data is present in an image file - many photographers use special EXIF-stripping utilities before uploading files to webservers if for some reason they don't want the client to know things like the time the shot was taken. Obviously this isn't a problem for images that have been 'saved as' with the EXIF data stripped out because they will have a new valid creation date being new files, but people do it to original files as well (or copies if they know what's good for them...). If not, then - as the main purpose of this discussion was about including valid creation date information in Metacard/Revolution applications - we should tweak Alex Tweedly's libEXIF stack to produce a handy function to include a reliable creation date information in our stacks if needed. It's not as trivial as it may sound. I work with a lot of programs that deal with EXIF data, and many of them store it differently, especially when it comes to images that started off as RAW files. Plus you'd have to try and decode the two gazzillion different RAW formats that are the result of a different file format for *every* camera model of *every* manufacturer... I'm probably coming across as really negative, but EXIF data is nowhere near as straightforward a topic as it first appears. :-( Ian ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
On 23 May 2007, at 09:17, Ian Wood wrote: Obviously this isn't a problem for images that have been 'saved as' with the EXIF data stripped out because they will have a new valid creation date being new files, but people do it to original files as well (or copies if they know what's good for them...). Wilhelm - out of curiosity, what would you regard as the 'correct' creation date for an image that has been opened, edited and saved to a new file? Ian ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
On 23 May 2007, at 09:17, Ian Wood wrote: Obviously this isn't a problem for images that have been 'saved as' with the EXIF data stripped out because they will have a new valid creation date being new files, but people do it to original files as well (or copies if they know what's good for them...). Wilhelm - out of curiosity, what would you regard as the 'correct' creation date for an image that has been opened, edited and saved to a new file? Ian First of all, I would like to have a correct creation date - the day the photo was taken - for all images whose contents remain unchanged although they may have been copied, transferred to another volume, or saved under they original or even a new name. As we have seen, this is not guaranteed, and the detailed-files function does not help much here. For an edited image this is a question to what extent changes were made, e.g. if only basic properties like contrast, color balance etc. were edited then I would prefer to keep the original creation date. If you more or less produce a new picture on the basis of the original one, it seems obvious that one should choose the modification date as the new creation date. The best alternative would be to have a choice: There are even tools that allow you to save the EXIF data before editing and then add them again after the image has been changed, like Exifer for Windows.- Another remark concerning my request to add the EXIF creation date to the detailed files: I see that the detailed-files function also collects platform-specific information, where the information is simply left out for the corresponding item when it does not apply for a platform. The arguments of Jim and Jaqueline need of course to be considered, especially the possible slowdown of data retrieval, but the extent of a decreased speed could be tested in practice. Best regards, Wilhelm Sanke http://www.sanke.org/MetaMedia ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
Wilhelm Sanke wrote: The best alternative would be to have a choice: There are even tools that allow you to save the EXIF data before editing and then add them again after the image has been changed, like Exifer for Windows.- Another remark concerning my request to add the EXIF creation date to the detailed files: I see that the detailed-files function also collects platform-specific information, where the information is simply left out for the corresponding item when it does not apply for a platform. The arguments of Jim and Jaqueline need of course to be considered, especially the possible slowdown of data retrieval, but the extent of a decreased speed could be tested in practice. Right now Rev uses the OS APIs to get the file info, so it's about as efficient as it can be. I can see the benefit of using EXIF, but since this requires additional work and processing time, and only applies to a subset of a very small number of file tyes, this sounds like an excellent candidate for an external. Anyone here interested in writing it? -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Media Corporation ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.FourthWorld.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: Error in docs about file creation date
I am not intending to continue this thread endlessly, but I think the last contributions and questions of Ian Wood and Jacqueline deserve another response. I had written: When a photo is taken, it gets a modification date at the same time, although it is - as it were - only modified out of non-existence. The creation date is generated when the image arrives on the computer, and a new creation date is generated each time the image is saved or copied. Simply moving an image to another folder does *not* change the creation date. This holds for Windows and Ian had pointed out that the situation might be different for MacOS. I had responded that for various reasons I am in the habit of *copying the files from the memory card to the computer. For that purpose I use an USB card reader. I have now tested simply moving the files from the memory card, and in this case the creation dates are indeed preserved. But copying/pasting of files to another folder or volume changes the creation date, as does save as under a different name, but in all these cases the EXIF-creation date - which is not taken into account by the detailed files function - remains unchanged. Jacqueline had commented: I know the Mac doesn't change creation dates when just saving a file, and I haven't noticed it on XP either -- though I admit I do very little editing on that OS. Most of my image editors are on the Mac. What about saved as?- As I don't have a card reader for the Mac (or could not get it configured for lack of a drivers disk) today I imported images directly from the camera via USB, once transferring the images directly from the camera by dragging the files from the memory card folder to a folder on the Mac desktop. The detailed files show the phantastic date of Jan 18, 2038 as the creation date, whereas the modification date is correct. When I open the folder in column view and click on a file name, I get the information that the creation date is empty. However, the correct EXIF creation date is still connected with the file and can be inspected with EXIF tools like Alex's libEXIF stack. Then I used iPhoto to *import the same files into the iPhoto Library: Now the detailed files show May 22 (today) both for the creation and the modification date. The information directly from the library folder in column view is the same. Apparently the iPhoto import function works in the same way I copy the images from the memory card to the computer on WindowsXP. Jaqueline again: But this does not explain the phantastic date of Jan 18, 2038 which I got for the creation date - item four of the detailed files - when I transferred files to my Powerbook with an USB stick.-- Oops, forgot to address this point. It would be interesting to see what the creation date is on the USB stick, before the transfer. I wonder if something about USB is munging the date somehow when the file is copied (I think you suspected this too at some point.) After you've copied the file to the hard drive, does the creation date listed in the properties dialog on XP match the unusual year as well? The creation date on the USB stick - after having copied the images there from my Windows computer and inspecting them there still from WindowsXP - show the actualized creation dates because they have been copied at the same date. But read from the Mac with the detailed files, we get Jan 18, 2038, and empty for the creation date when looking at the file information in the Mac folder. The EXIF data are intact in this case, too, which read May 5th as the correct creation date in this case. I tried three other USB sticks and always get the same phantastic creation date. When I connect an old Mac harddisk via USB with my Powerbook, the phantastic date does *not* appear.-- I repeat my recommendation to add the ability to read EXIF data with the detailed files function: EXIFdata seem to be really reliable data, survive most transfer procedures, and spare you the trouble to remember in which way you have transferred image files from one volume or folder to another or which special photo tool you used to transfer the images. And they survive even when the image file is saved as under a different name. They will disappear only when you make major changes to the image contents - like manipulating the imagedata. Regards, Wilhelm Sanke http://www.sanke.org/MetaMedia ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
Wilhelm Sanke wrote: I repeat my recommendation to add the ability to read EXIF data with the detailed files function: I don't know if I'd like that. To read the EXIF data, every file would have to be opened and read individually, which would be very time-consuming. As it is now, a single call to the OS returns all the information without having to open (or even acknowledge) any files at all. Reading a lot of files in a folder, just to see if they have EXIF data, and if so, retrieve that data, would really slow down the detailed files function for people who aren't working with image files. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.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: Error in docs about file creation date
On 5/22/07 2:09 PM, J. Landman Gay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wilhelm Sanke wrote: I repeat my recommendation to add the ability to read EXIF data with the detailed files function: I don't know if I'd like that. To read the EXIF data, every file would have to be opened and read individually, which would be very time-consuming. As it is now, a single call to the OS returns all the information without having to open (or even acknowledge) any files at all. Reading a lot of files in a folder, just to see if they have EXIF data, and if so, retrieve that data, would really slow down the detailed files function for people who aren't working with image files. And beyond that, EXIF data is not part of all image files, mostly only those files from a device such as a camera. If you have iPhoto open, you can use AppleScript to tell iPhoto to return the EXIF data in an image file in its library. The same will work for Photoshop and Graphic Converter. I don't believe the OSX Finder app will read this part of an image file, and the Rev 'detailed files' returns info by asking the Finder to get it. I could be wrong about this. Try it and see. Jim Ault Las Vegas ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
I repeat my recommendation to add the ability to read EXIF data with the detailed files function: EXIFdata seem to be really reliable data, survive most transfer procedures, and spare you the trouble to remember in which way you have transferred image files from one volume or folder to another or which special photo tool you used to transfer the images. And they survive even when the image file is saved as under a different name. They will disappear only when you make major changes to the image contents - like manipulating the imagedata. Regards, Wilhelm Sanke I am not sure why you would want an operating system to look into the file content to fetch a date. After all, EXIF data is file content. I think that detailed files reports correctly file data as seen by the operating system. Robert ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
Jacqueline Landman Gay wrote: Wilhelm Sanke wrote: I repeat my recommendation to add the ability to read EXIF data with the detailed files function: I don't know if I'd like that. To read the EXIF data, every file would have to be opened and read individually, which would be very time-consuming. As it is now, a single call to the OS returns all the information without having to open (or even acknowledge) any files at all. Reading a lot of files in a folder, just to see if they have EXIF data, and if so, retrieve that data, would really slow down the detailed files function for people who aren't working with image files. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jacque at hyperactivesw.com HyperActive Software and Jim Ault from sunny Las Vegas wrote: And beyond that, EXIF data is not part of all image files, mostly only those files from a device such as a camera. If you have iPhoto open, you can use AppleScript to tell iPhoto to return the EXIF data in an image file in its library. The same will work for Photoshop and Graphic Converter. I don't believe the OSX Finder app will read this part of an image file, and the Rev 'detailed files' returns info by asking the Finder to get it. I could be wrong about this. Try it and see. These are indeed valid arguments that have to be considered . As far as I know, however, the situation may be at least different for Windows and MacOS. I do not know if the OSX finder could access EXIF data automatically, but WindowsXP surely does. The EXIF creation date of a camera image is automatically read by WindowsXP, as can be seen in the file information when you configure the folder setting accordingly. So there would be no slowdown of any kind when incorporating this information in the detailed files. I am not really sure what the OSX finder does. If in fact it should be able to access such data, then I would repeat my recommendation for the detailed files. If not, then - as the main purpose of this discussion was about including valid creation date information in Metacard/Revolution applications - we should tweak Alex Tweedly's libEXIF stack to produce a handy function to include a reliable creation date information in our stacks if needed. Regards, Wilhelm Sanke http://www.sanke.org/MetaMedia ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
On 5/22/07 3:30 PM, Wilhelm Sanke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As far as I know, however, the situation may be at least different for Windows and MacOS. I do not know if the OSX finder could access EXIF data automatically, but WindowsXP surely does. A glimpse of why cross-platform can be difficult or impossible. Parameters dispersed, formatted and gathered in so many ways. Of course, those companies never change how they do things, so, thankfully, the moving target challenge is not a factor. (I am leaving out the possibility that an OS could have bugs in it, since OS'es are not released before thorough beta testing. All these updates for OSX are merely cosmetic or to improve your iTunes Store shopping experience.) Jim Ault Las Vegas ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
Robert Brenstein rjb at robelko.com wrote: I am not sure why you would want an operating system to look into the file content to fetch a date. After all, EXIF data is file content. I think that detailed files reports correctly file data as seen by the operating system. Robert Robert, one of the points we investigated in this long thread was that the detailed-files information can come up with up to *four* different creation dates for the same image file, depending on how the files were transferred from the camera to the computer, which OS and what special photo tool was used, and if the files had been moved or copied or saved from one volume or folder to another. The term creation date is misleading here, because what the detailed files retrieves is basically different from the real creation date of a camera image. Only in some cases is the detailed-files creation date identical with the creation date of the photo. Regards, Wilhelm Sanke http://www.sanke.org/MetaMedia ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
The term creation date is misleading here, because what the detailed files retrieves is basically different from the real creation date of a camera image. Only in some cases is the detailed-files creation date identical with the creation date of the photo. Regards, Wilhelm Sanke I can see that in case of photos, it would be nice to have a direct access to the date the photo was taken, but I think it is still correct that file creation date can but must not be the same as photo (image = content) creation date, which is what you seemed to have been asking for. May be one day the content creation date will become another file attribute. Robert ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
Could the 2038 date be set on the camera? By mistake of course... Cheers, Luis. On 22 May 2007, at 21:44, Wilhelm Sanke wrote: I am not intending to continue this thread endlessly, but I think the last contributions and questions of Ian Wood and Jacqueline deserve another response. I had written: When a photo is taken, it gets a modification date at the same time, although it is - as it were - only modified out of non- existence. The creation date is generated when the image arrives on the computer, and a new creation date is generated each time the image is saved or copied. Simply moving an image to another folder does *not* change the creation date. This holds for Windows and Ian had pointed out that the situation might be different for MacOS. I had responded that for various reasons I am in the habit of *copying the files from the memory card to the computer. For that purpose I use an USB card reader. I have now tested simply moving the files from the memory card, and in this case the creation dates are indeed preserved. But copying/pasting of files to another folder or volume changes the creation date, as does save as under a different name, but in all these cases the EXIF-creation date - which is not taken into account by the detailed files function - remains unchanged. Jacqueline had commented: I know the Mac doesn't change creation dates when just saving a file, and I haven't noticed it on XP either -- though I admit I do very little editing on that OS. Most of my image editors are on the Mac. What about saved as?- As I don't have a card reader for the Mac (or could not get it configured for lack of a drivers disk) today I imported images directly from the camera via USB, once transferring the images directly from the camera by dragging the files from the memory card folder to a folder on the Mac desktop. The detailed files show the phantastic date of Jan 18, 2038 as the creation date, whereas the modification date is correct. When I open the folder in column view and click on a file name, I get the information that the creation date is empty. However, the correct EXIF creation date is still connected with the file and can be inspected with EXIF tools like Alex's libEXIF stack. Then I used iPhoto to *import the same files into the iPhoto Library: Now the detailed files show May 22 (today) both for the creation and the modification date. The information directly from the library folder in column view is the same. Apparently the iPhoto import function works in the same way I copy the images from the memory card to the computer on WindowsXP. Jaqueline again: But this does not explain the phantastic date of Jan 18, 2038 which I got for the creation date - item four of the detailed files - when I transferred files to my Powerbook with an USB stick.-- Oops, forgot to address this point. It would be interesting to see what the creation date is on the USB stick, before the transfer. I wonder if something about USB is munging the date somehow when the file is copied (I think you suspected this too at some point.) After you've copied the file to the hard drive, does the creation date listed in the properties dialog on XP match the unusual year as well? The creation date on the USB stick - after having copied the images there from my Windows computer and inspecting them there still from WindowsXP - show the actualized creation dates because they have been copied at the same date. But read from the Mac with the detailed files, we get Jan 18, 2038, and empty for the creation date when looking at the file information in the Mac folder. The EXIF data are intact in this case, too, which read May 5th as the correct creation date in this case. I tried three other USB sticks and always get the same phantastic creation date. When I connect an old Mac harddisk via USB with my Powerbook, the phantastic date does *not* appear.-- I repeat my recommendation to add the ability to read EXIF data with the detailed files function: EXIFdata seem to be really reliable data, survive most transfer procedures, and spare you the trouble to remember in which way you have transferred image files from one volume or folder to another or which special photo tool you used to transfer the images. And they survive even when the image file is saved as under a different name. They will disappear only when you make major changes to the image contents - like manipulating the imagedata. Regards, Wilhelm Sanke http://www.sanke.org/MetaMedia ___ 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
Re: Error in docs about file creation date
Ran the script here, on Mac 10.4.9, Rev 2.8.1 - all detailed files info matched the finder Best, Mark On 21 May 2007, at 03:04, J. Landman Gay wrote: Wilhelm Sanke wrote: The results I get here using your script are exactly the same as with my slightly different script I think we need to find out why we're getting different results. A search in bugzilla gives two related bugs, both now fixed: 4293 The detailed files doesn't return correct creation date f... 4474 Detailed Files Always Returns 0 for Last Modified and 000... The first one involves only files with long file names on OS X. The second doesn't match your results (you aren't getting 0, you are getting real dates.) But maybe you could read these two and see if either apply to your situation. My own results are correct in both XP and OS X, so I don't know what else to say. It would be great if others could do some checking. Maybe that would give us a clue what the differences are between your results and mine. There isn't much to go on so far. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.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: Error in docs about file creation date
Improved version of the modification date handler in Rev.
This version will parse and deliver the dates and times in separate columns
to make it easier to do comparisons. That's all the time I have for now, so
hopefully this will help soomeone track what's happening
replace the previous script
on mousedoubleup
set the cursor to busy
put fld asScriptModDates into cmd
do cmd as applescript
put the result into ans
put char 2 to -2 of ans into ans
put quote into q
put comma into c
replace comma with cr in ans
filter ans without *sunday
filter ans without *monday
filter ans without *tuesday
filter ans without *wednesday
filter ans without *thursday
filter ans without *friday
filter ans without *saturday
replace cr with comma in ans
replace (qNewLine) with cr in ans
replace (qc) with tab in ans
replace (date q) with empty in ans
replace (tab q) with empty in ans
set the itemdel to tab
repeat for each line LNN in ans
put item 1 of LNN tab after newAns
put word 1 to 3 of item 2 of LNN tab after newAns
put word 4 to -1 of item 2 of LNN tab after newAns
put word 1 to 3 of item 3 of LNN tab after newAns
put word 4 to -1 of item 3 of LNN tab after newAns
put item 4 to -1 of LNN cr after newAns
end repeat
put newAns into msg
set the clipboarddata to newAns
--now paste into Excel to see in columns
end mousedoubleup
---
On 5/20/07 9:39 PM, Jim Ault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have little experience with virus systems or other defenses against
macros, but could it be possible that files may be 'quarantined' or marked
or symbolized in such a way that a security system might interfere with file
info?
Wilhelm: if you run an Applescript that gets the same info during the same
handler, does this return the matching value?
I wrote these in about 30 minutes so you might want to refine them to do a
better job (they work on my OSX)
You need to have the front window in the Finder showing the folder of files
you want. This list will include folders and show the flag as the last col.
- start copy here paste into a Rev field asScriptModDates
try
tell application Finder to set the source_folder to (folder of the
front window) as alias
on error -- no open folder windows
set the source_folder to path to desktop folder as alias
end try
set the item_list to list folder source_folder without invisibles
set source_folder to source_folder as string --conversion
set outputList to {}
repeat with i from 1 to number of items in the item_list
set this_item to item i of the item_list
set this_item to (source_folder this_item) as alias
set this_info to info for this_item
copy NewLine to end of outputList
copy the name of this_info to end of outputList
copy the creation date of this_info to end of outputList
copy the modification date of this_info to end of outputList
copy the folder of this_info to end of outputList
end repeat
return outputList
end copy of Applescript
run this handler to get the dates into columns
-- start copy here paste into stack script
on mousedoubleup
set the cursor to busy
put fld asScriptModDates into cmd
do cmd as applescript
put the result into ans
put char 2 to -2 of ans into ans
put quote into q
put comma into c
replace (qNewLine) with cr in ans
replace (qc) with tab in ans
replace (date q) with empty in ans
replace (tab q) with empty in ans
put ans into msg
set the clipboarddata to ans
--now paste into Excel to see in columns
end mousedoubleup
-- end copy
Hope this helps dial in on the inaccuracies.
Jim Ault
Las Vegas
On 5/20/07 7:04 PM, J. Landman Gay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wilhelm Sanke wrote:
The results I get here using your script are exactly the same as with my
slightly different script
I think we need to find out why we're getting different results. A
search in bugzilla gives two related bugs, both now fixed:
4293 The detailed files doesn't return correct creation date f...
4474 Detailed Files Always Returns 0 for Last Modified and 000...
The first one involves only files with long file names on OS X. The
second doesn't match your results (you aren't getting 0, you are getting
real dates.) But maybe you could read these two and see if either apply
to your situation.
My own results are correct in both XP and OS X, so I don't know what
else to say. It would be great if others could do some checking. Maybe
that would give us a clue what the differences are between your results
and mine. There isn't much to go on so far.
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
Re: Error in docs about file creation date
Mark Smith wrote: Ran the script here, on Mac 10.4.9, Rev 2.8.1 - all detailed files info matched the finder Thanks for checking, Mark. It's puzzling why we're getting different results than Wilhelm. Any XP users who feel like running the script? Here it is again: on mouseUp answer folder Choose a folder: set the directory to it put the detailed files into fld 1 repeat with x = 1 to the number of lines in in fld 1 get item 4 of line x of fld 1 convert it to short date and time put it into item 4 of line x of fld 1 get item 5 of line x of fld 1 convert it to short date and time put it into item 5 of line x of fld 1 end repeat end mouseUp -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.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: Error in docs about file creation date
First a word of thanks to Jacqueline and Jim Ault for their patience with which they try to help finding out what is going on behind the scenes. I think I know now where Rev is looking for date information with the detailed files on WindowsXP. There are fours kinds of date data with image files, and three for all other non-image files. For image files they are: - date of taking the photo - creation of file - modification of the file - date of last access to the file If you customize your folder accordingly, the date informations are displayed in the following order: Modification, photo taken, created, last access. The date when the photo was taken is also displayed in the tooltip when you move the mouse cursor over the image file. Then you have a properties pane for each file which you open with right-click on the file. From this pane you can inspect the EXIF data - if there are any - and also look at creation, modification, and last-access dates. From these 4 categories of date information the detailed files access two, namely creation of file and modification of the file. Now, one important aspect of the date informations is how they are related to each other. This is where some difficulties of understanding may arise - as in my case. When a photo is taken, it gets a modification date at the same time, although it is - as it were - only modified out of non-existence. The creation date is generated when the image arrives on the computer, and a new creation date is generated each time the image is saved or copied. Simply moving an image to another folder does *not* change the creation date. This leads to the at first glance puzzling effect that the creation date is normally a later date than the modification date, the latter of which may even still be identical with the date the photo was taken, i.e. when it was really created as a photo. Thus in the majority of cases, what passes as modification date in the detailed files is the nearest you can get to the date the photo was taken. Creation date and date of photo taken can only be identical when the picture is transferred from the camera to the computer on the same day the photo was taken.- This all holds for WindowsXP and probably to some extent for MacOS, too. But this does not explain the phantastic date of Jan 18, 2038 which I got for the creation date - item four of the detailed files - when I transferred files to my Powerbook with an USB stick.-- What should the Rev quality team do in this matter? At least explain in the docs that the detailed files make no use of the EXIF data (which would indeed be accessible on WindowsXP) and describe in some plain words the specific nature of the creation and modification dates retrieved by the detailed files. The best way of course would be to add the real-photo-creation date from the EXIF data to the detailed files, such an additional item of the detailed files could then return empty when no EXIF data are available - as in the case of other items when no information matches such an item. I think I should submit an enhancement request, and for the time being I will use the modification date in my thumbs stack. Best regards, Wilhelm Sanke http://www.sanke.org/MetaMedia ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
J. Landman Gay wrote: Mark Smith wrote: Ran the script here, on Mac 10.4.9, Rev 2.8.1 - all detailed files info matched the finder Thanks for checking, Mark. It's puzzling why we're getting different results than Wilhelm. Any XP users who feel like running the script? Here it is again: on mouseUp answer folder Choose a folder: set the directory to it put the detailed files into fld 1 repeat with x = 1 to the number of lines in in fld 1 get item 4 of line x of fld 1 convert it to short date and time put it into item 4 of line x of fld 1 get item 5 of line x of fld 1 convert it to short date and time put it into item 5 of line x of fld 1 end repeat end mouseUp My (linewrapped) results on XP look like this: altindex.php,10225,,5/16/07 11:15 AM,5/20/07 4:18 PM,1179771621,0,0,0,666, The dates are OK, although the result does deviate from what the docs tell you to expect in that items 3 and 11 (unsupported on windows) are supposed to therefore contain zero, according to the docs, in the same way as items 7,8,9. But are in fact empty. Unlikely to cause any real trouble I would think, but you never know. Martin Baxter ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
On 21 May 2007, at 20:00, Wilhelm Sanke wrote: When a photo is taken, it gets a modification date at the same time, although it is - as it were - only modified out of non- existence. The creation date is generated when the image arrives on the computer, and a new creation date is generated each time the image is saved or copied. Simply moving an image to another folder does *not* change the creation date. FWIW, that's NOT true on OS X. At least when downloading images using Image Capture, iPhoto or Aperture, the creation date allocated to the file is the time that the file was saved to the memory card. The time it was downloaded does not appear in the file info in any way. The creation date sometimes gets altered as you describe when uploaded and downloading, but copying and/or saving doesn't alter it. I've not tested it to be sure, but suspect that OS X is keeping the proper creation date as long as the file is on an HFS volume. Ian ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
Martin Baxter wrote: The dates are OK, although the result does deviate from what the docs tell you to expect in that items 3 and 11 (unsupported on windows) are supposed to therefore contain zero, according to the docs, in the same way as items 7,8,9. But are in fact empty. Unlikely to cause any real trouble I would think, but you never know. Thanks for running the check, it's been an interesting thread. When I was reseraching it in bugzilla I saw there's a bug report about the lack of zeros on unsupported Windows items (bug #606.) It's marked as minor but you could add comments to it if you think it's important. A workaround for now is to have scripts check for 0 rather than zero itself. That way both zero and empty would evaluate the same way. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.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: Error in docs about file creation date
Wilhelm Sanke wrote: When a photo is taken, it gets a modification date at the same time, although it is - as it were - only modified out of non-existence. The creation date is generated when the image arrives on the computer, and a new creation date is generated each time the image is saved or copied. Simply moving an image to another folder does *not* change the creation date. Wow, that sure doesn't seem right. I wonder if the editing app you are using is saving the files by creating copies and then deleting the originals? That might explain it. I know the Mac doesn't change creation dates when just saving a file, and I haven't noticed it on XP either -- though I admit I do very little editing on that OS. Most of my image editors are on the Mac. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.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: Error in docs about file creation date
Wilhelm Sanke wrote: But this does not explain the phantastic date of Jan 18, 2038 which I got for the creation date - item four of the detailed files - when I transferred files to my Powerbook with an USB stick.-- Oops, forgot to address this point. It would be interesting to see what the creation date is on the USB stick, before the transfer. I wonder if something about USB is munging the date somehow when the file is copied (I think you suspected this too at some point.) After you've copied the file to the hard drive, does the creation date listed in the properties dialog on XP match the unusual year as well? -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.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: Error in docs about file creation date
Ian Wood, revlist at azurevision.co.uk wrote: The creation date is generated when the image arrives on the computer, and a new creation date is generated each time the image is saved or copied. Simply moving an image to another folder does *not* change the creation date. FWIW, that's NOT true on OS X. At least when downloading images using Image Capture, iPhoto or Aperture, the creation date allocated to the file is the time that the file was saved to the memory card. The time it was downloaded does not appear in the file info in any way. The creation date sometimes gets altered as you describe when uploaded and downloading, but copying and/or saving doesn't alter it. I occured to me immediately after I sent the post that what I said about arriving on the computer reflects my habit to copy the photo files from the memory card to the computer. I usually use memory cards of 1 and 2 GB and firstly *copy* the photos for safety reasons - it could happen that during the transfer something goes awry - and because I like to keep the photos on the cards for a certain time to copy them elsewhere or have them ready for display on a TV or for simply looking through them on the camera. Wilhelm Sanke http://www.sanke.org/MeaMedia ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
On Sat, 19 May 2007, J. Landman Gay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think Rev just makes a call to the OS to get the info. If the detailed file info matches the Finder (or the info in Windows Explorer) then I think the behavior is correct. Rev doesn't actually read any of the files itself, it just gets whatever the OS returns. (snip) But then, it seems there is no reliable procedure to get at the creation dates when you use the detailed files - meaning the docs are not fully correct here. See if they match what the OS thinks they should be. If they do, then I think it's working. If you need to read the stored EXIF data instead, then you'd need to use Alex's utility or something similar. When I copy files to my Windows box, it too changes the creation date sometimes. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | Am I right to assume that what he OS thinks can be seen when you open a folder in the details view (Windows XP), where the modification and creation dates (interestingly in this order) are displayed? If this is the case then it is also safe to assume that the detailed files function of Rev never looks at these internal OS data, and only in rare cases comes up with matching data. Otherwise it is not comprehensible that creation dates are not retrieved from the OS (by the detailed files of Rev) when they in fact could easily be inspected in the folder/file information of the OS - and, as I already pointed out, sometimes you get sort of transfer data through the detailed files that cannot be found among the OS information. I have got one image folder here, where the OS clearly shows different modification and creation dates, but on using the detailed files of Rev only the modification dates are shown both with item 4 and item 5 of the detailed files. Concerning MacOS the internal image file data can most probably be inspected using a Mac application like iTunes. As I reported in my first post of May 19, image M ( the one I slightly modified by changing the contrast, but saved with the same name) shows the following data in iTunes: On my Mac: The photo information in iTunes reads for image M: created (aufgenommen in German): March 4 digitalized: March 4 modified : March 4 imported : May 19 for image O: created:March 4 digitalized: March 4 modified : March 4 imported : May 19 Image M was indeed modified by me on May 19 in the way described above, but apparently this modification (by keeping the name and only changing the contrast) is not recognized as a modification by the Mac OS. But the detailed files display the imported date as modification (or creation) in the case of image M, but not in the case of the unmodified image O, although the latter was also imported on May 19. So much for the reliability of the detailed files and the correspondence with OS information. The detailed-files function of Rev appears to be extremely buggy, and the Rev team should take a close look both at the function itself and the corresponding information in the docs. Regards, Wilhelm Sanke http://www.sanke.org/MetaMedia ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
Wilhelm Sanke wrote: The detailed-files function of Rev appears to be extremely buggy, and the Rev team should take a close look both at the function itself and the corresponding information in the docs. I can't reproduce any problems with it at all. Here is a test I did. Create a stack with a single field and one button. The button script: on mouseUp answer folder Choose a folder: set the directory to it put the detailed files into fld 1 repeat with x = 1 to the number of lines in in fld 1 get item 4 of line x of fld 1 convert it to short date and time put it into item 4 of line x of fld 1 get item 5 of line x of fld 1 convert it to short date and time put it into item 5 of line x of fld 1 end repeat end mouseUp This will give you a list of detailed files with the creation and modification dates converted so they are easier to read. I ran this script on several folders in OS X and then compared the results in the field to the info the Finder gives me when I get info on each file. The creation and modification dates and times matched exactly in all cases. Some of the files had been copied to my hard drive from another volume. Those files showed a creation date that was the day I copied them, not the day of their original creation on the original volume. The OS does that. But in all cases, the detailed files always returned the same results that the Finder gives in its Get Info information. Then I opened the same stack in WinXP and got identical results. The creation and modification dates on each file matched the ones given in the Properties dialog for each file. A few files -- which had been copied from a Mac volume to Windows -- gave strange dates where the modification date was earlier than the creation date. But when I looked at the Properties for those files in WinXP, Windows listed the same odd dates in its dialogs. This seems to show that that Rev is retrieving the information from the OS, as expected, and that any unusual results are due to the OS rather than to Revolution. Do you get similar results if you run the above script? -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.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: Error in docs about file creation date
J. Landman Gay jacque at hyperactivesw.com wrote today: Wilhelm Sanke wrote: The detailed-files function of Rev appears to be extremely buggy, and the Rev team should take a close look both at the function itself and the corresponding information in the docs. I can't reproduce any problems with it at all. Here is a test I did. Create a stack with a single field and one button. The button script: on mouseUp answer folder Choose a folder: set the directory to it put the detailed files into fld 1 repeat with x = 1 to the number of lines in in fld 1 get item 4 of line x of fld 1 convert it to short date and time put it into item 4 of line x of fld 1 get item 5 of line x of fld 1 convert it to short date and time put it into item 5 of line x of fld 1 end repeat end mouseUp This will give you a list of detailed files with the creation and modification dates converted so they are easier to read. (snip) Then I opened the same stack in WinXP and got identical results. The creation and modification dates on each file matched the ones given in the Properties dialog for each file. A few files -- which had been copied from a Mac volume to Windows -- gave strange dates where the modification date was earlier than the creation date. But when I looked at the Properties for those files in WinXP, Windows listed the same odd dates in its dialogs. This seems to show that that Rev is retrieving the information from the OS, as expected, and that any unusual results are due to the OS rather than to Revolution. Do you get similar results if you run the above script? Nope, I am sorry. I do not rule out that the OS data and the detailed files data might match under circumstances I cannot define. The results I get here using your script are exactly the same as with my slightly different script (Indeed I had hoped that it could be a script issue - in which case the syntactic recommendations of the docs how to convert the items of the detailed files would have been in question) For the folder I mentioned in my last post - where the WindowsXP OS information clearly shows different dates for modification and creation - with your script I get the same results as before: Only the modification date is shown both in item 4 and item 5 of the detailed files. For the M - modified - and O images - not modified - on MacOS I also get the same results as before: Item 4 displays the mentioned phantastic date of Jan 18, 2038 - which is probably the USB-stick transfer date - in item 5 with image M the imported date May 19 is shown, while the iTunes data show March 4 as the creation date. For image O - the not-modified image - item 4 shows Jan 18, 2038 and item 5 March 4, not using here the imported date March 19 of iTunes.- Maybe my two main computers are infected with a special detailed-files virus. If this is not the case then I have to repeat my statements that The detailed-files function of Rev appears to be extremely buggy, and the Rev team should take a close look both at the function itself and the corresponding information in the docs. Best regards, Wilhelm Sanke http://www.sanke.org/MetaMedia ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
Wilhelm Sanke wrote: The results I get here using your script are exactly the same as with my slightly different script I think we need to find out why we're getting different results. A search in bugzilla gives two related bugs, both now fixed: 4293 The detailed files doesn't return correct creation date f... 4474 Detailed Files Always Returns 0 for Last Modified and 000... The first one involves only files with long file names on OS X. The second doesn't match your results (you aren't getting 0, you are getting real dates.) But maybe you could read these two and see if either apply to your situation. My own results are correct in both XP and OS X, so I don't know what else to say. It would be great if others could do some checking. Maybe that would give us a clue what the differences are between your results and mine. There isn't much to go on so far. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.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: Error in docs about file creation date
I have little experience with virus systems or other defenses against
macros, but could it be possible that files may be 'quarantined' or marked
or symbolized in such a way that a security system might interfere with file
info?
Wilhelm: if you run an Applescript that gets the same info during the same
handler, does this return the matching value?
I wrote these in about 30 minutes so you might want to refine them to do a
better job (they work on my OSX)
You need to have the front window in the Finder showing the folder of files
you want. This list will include folders and show the flag as the last col.
- start copy here paste into a Rev field asScriptModDates
try
tell application Finder to set the source_folder to (folder of the
front window) as alias
on error -- no open folder windows
set the source_folder to path to desktop folder as alias
end try
set the item_list to list folder source_folder without invisibles
set source_folder to source_folder as string --conversion
set outputList to {}
repeat with i from 1 to number of items in the item_list
set this_item to item i of the item_list
set this_item to (source_folder this_item) as alias
set this_info to info for this_item
copy NewLine to end of outputList
copy the name of this_info to end of outputList
copy the creation date of this_info to end of outputList
copy the modification date of this_info to end of outputList
copy the folder of this_info to end of outputList
end repeat
return outputList
end copy of Applescript
run this handler to get the dates into columns
-- start copy here paste into stack script
on mousedoubleup
set the cursor to busy
put fld asScriptModDates into cmd
do cmd as applescript
put the result into ans
put char 2 to -2 of ans into ans
put quote into q
put comma into c
replace (qNewLine) with cr in ans
replace (qc) with tab in ans
replace (date q) with empty in ans
replace (tab q) with empty in ans
put ans into msg
set the clipboarddata to ans
--now paste into Excel to see in columns
end mousedoubleup
-- end copy
Hope this helps dial in on the inaccuracies.
Jim Ault
Las Vegas
On 5/20/07 7:04 PM, J. Landman Gay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wilhelm Sanke wrote:
The results I get here using your script are exactly the same as with my
slightly different script
I think we need to find out why we're getting different results. A
search in bugzilla gives two related bugs, both now fixed:
4293 The detailed files doesn't return correct creation date f...
4474 Detailed Files Always Returns 0 for Last Modified and 000...
The first one involves only files with long file names on OS X. The
second doesn't match your results (you aren't getting 0, you are getting
real dates.) But maybe you could read these two and see if either apply
to your situation.
My own results are correct in both XP and OS X, so I don't know what
else to say. It would be great if others could do some checking. Maybe
that would give us a clue what the differences are between your results
and mine. There isn't much to go on so far.
___
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: Error in docs about file creation date
Jim Ault wrote: I have little experience with virus systems or other defenses against macros, but could it be possible that files may be 'quarantined' or marked or symbolized in such a way that a security system might interfere with file info? Wilhelm: if you run an Applescript that gets the same info during the same handler, does this return the matching value? Jim, would you be willing to run the script I wrote to see what results you get on your own machine? (Or anyone else?) This thing has me curious now. Does the output of the detailed files on your Mac match what the Finder says? -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.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: Error in docs about file creation date
On Fri, 18 May 2007, J. Landman Gay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wilhelm Sanke wrote: While trying to add the creation date to the filename in a thumbs application I noticed that the creation date is actually item 5 of the detailed files rather than item 4, number 4 really containing the modification date. Since the detailed files was introduced in Rev version 1.0 and modified in 1.1 nobody seems to have made use of the creation date over the last years? On my OS X machine, it's the way the docs say. What OS are you using? -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com I observed this while working on a WindowsXP machine, and I have now checked what happens on MacOS (still 10.3.9 on my G4 Powerbook). For the testing I used two JPG-images, both taken on March 4 with a digital camera. I modfied one of these images today - May 19 - by changing the contrast with PaintshopPro 11 and saving the image under the same name. For purposes of comparison, let's call this image M for modification. I did not touch or change the second image in any way, let's call it O for original. I copied both images to the Powerbook using an USB stick. Looking at the EXIF data of the images (with PaintshopPro on Windows) I get this information: Image M: date and time : May 19 original date : March 4 digitalized: : March 4 Image O: date and time : March 4 original date : March 4 digitalized: : March 4 Loading the two images into my thumbs application and using the detailed files I get with item 5 of the detailed files image M: May 19, and for image O: March 4. With item 4 of the detailed files I get March 15 for both images, which is apparently the date I transferred the images from my camera to the computer, a value not contained in the EXIF data. On my Mac: The photo information in iTunes reads for image M: created (aufgenommen in German): March 4 digitalized: March 4 modified : March 4 imported : May 19 for image O: created:March 4 digitalized: March 4 modified : March 4 imported : May 19 Now the corresponding image information in the thumbs stack on the Powerbook: With item 5 of the detailed files I get May 19 for image M and March 4 for image O. With item 4 of the detailed files I get Jan 18, 2038 for both images!(?); maybe this is an effect of the USB stick? (The date information in the systems folder shows correctly the date of today May 19.) Here is the script snippet I use to append the creation date to the image name field under the thumb: put item 5 of line i of tdetfiles into Datum convert Datum from dateitems to long date put Tabitem 2 to 3 of Datum after fld Feld Summary: - modification and creation dates are not exactly corresponding to EXIF or iTunes information - using item 4 of the detailed files which somehow returns a transfer date is not really useful. It probably only returns a creation date when an image was created on the computer and not transferred from elsewhere. -- Wilhelm Sanke http://www.sanke.org/MetaMedia ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
Wilhelm Sanke wrote: snip with item 5 of the detailed files image M: May 19, and for image O: March 4. This is correct, yes? With item 4 of the detailed files I get March 15 for both images, which is apparently the date I transferred the images from my camera to the computer, a value not contained in the EXIF data. I see that on my Mac sometimes too. It seems to happen when copying a file between volumes (like when you transfered the file from the USB stick.) On my Mac: The photo information in iTunes reads for image M: created (aufgenommen in German): March 4 digitalized: March 4 modified : March 4 imported : May 19 for image O: created:March 4 digitalized: March 4 modified : March 4 imported : May 19 Now the corresponding image information in the thumbs stack on the Powerbook: With item 5 of the detailed files I get May 19 for image M and March 4 for image O. This also looks right to me. Item 5 is the modification date. With item 4 of the detailed files I get Jan 18, 2038 for both images!(?); maybe this is an effect of the USB stick? (The date information in the systems folder shows correctly the date of today May 19.) Here is the script snippet I use to append the creation date to the image name field under the thumb: put item 5 of line i of tdetfiles into Datum convert Datum from dateitems to long date put Tabitem 2 to 3 of Datum after fld Feld Shouldn't line 2 be convert Datum from seconds to long date? Does it work if you change that line? -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.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: Error in docs about file creation date
J. Landman Gay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here is the script snippet I use to append the creation date to the image name field under the thumb: put item 5 of line i of tdetfiles into Datum convert Datum from dateitems to long date put Tabitem 2 to 3 of Datum after fld Feld Shouldn't line 2 be convert Datum from seconds to long date? Does it work if you change that line? -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software With from seconds to long date I get the same results as with dateitems, namely March 15 for item 4 of the detailed files - which is the transfer date, i.e. *not* the creation date that is part of the EXIF information. Same for item 5, May 19, and March 4 who could indeed be construed as modification dates. But then, it seems there is no reliable procedure to get at the creation dates when you use the detailed files - meaning the docs are not fully correct here. Like with the EXIF image information in PaintshopPro, Alex Tweedly's libEXIF stack correctly returns the creation dates of the same images in question, i.e. the very same images at the same place which return transfer dates when you use the detailed files I will take a closer look at Alex's stack to see whether part of the functions could be incorporated into my thumbs stack to display reliable creation.data, depending, of course, on Alex's agreement. Regards, Wilhelm Sanke http://www.sanke.org/MetaMedia ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
Wilhelm Sanke wrote: With from seconds to long date I get the same results as with dateitems, namely March 15 for item 4 of the detailed files - which is the transfer date, i.e. *not* the creation date that is part of the EXIF information. I think Rev just makes a call to the OS to get the info. If the detailed file info matches the Finder (or the info in Windows Explorer) then I think the behavior is correct. Rev doesn't actually read any of the files itself, it just gets whatever the OS returns. Same for item 5, May 19, and March 4 who could indeed be construed as modification dates. But then, it seems there is no reliable procedure to get at the creation dates when you use the detailed files - meaning the docs are not fully correct here. See if they match what the OS thinks they should be. If they do, then I think it's working. If you need to read the stored EXIF data instead, then you'd need to use Alex's utility or something similar. When I copy files to my Windows box, it too changes the creation date sometimes. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.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
Error in docs about file creation date
The docs contain the following information about the detailed files: The detailed files form returns a list of files, one file per line. Each line contains the following attributes, separated by commas: * The file's name, URL-encoded * The file's size in bytes (on Mac OS and OS X systems, the size of the file's data fork) * The resource fork size in bytes (Mac OS and OS X systems only) * The file's creation date in seconds (Mac OS, OS X, and Windows systems only) * The file's modification date in seconds etc. While trying to add the creation date to the filename in a thumbs application I noticed that the creation date is actually item 5 of the detailed files rather than item 4, number 4 really containing the modification date. Since the detailed files was introduced in Rev version 1.0 and modified in 1.1 nobody seems to have made use of the creation date over the last years? -- Wilhelm Sanke ___ 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: Error in docs about file creation date
Wilhelm Sanke wrote: While trying to add the creation date to the filename in a thumbs application I noticed that the creation date is actually item 5 of the detailed files rather than item 4, number 4 really containing the modification date. Since the detailed files was introduced in Rev version 1.0 and modified in 1.1 nobody seems to have made use of the creation date over the last years? On my OS X machine, it's the way the docs say. What OS are you using? -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.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
Something to add to the Rev Docs
If the docs don't clearly spell this out, they should. Hopefully, this 2.9 with the Doc fixes can add something as tiny, but important, as this. Joe Wilkins On May 14, 2007, at 3:18 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: Devin Asay wrote: In turns out all you have to do is use the within() function. That looks at the actual outline of the graphic instead of the rect. I didn't realize until today that the 'is within' operator and the 'within()' function have this subtle difference. Very cool. Whoa, I didn't know that either! What a nice surprise. :) -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.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: Something to add to the Rev Docs
On May 14, 2007, at 4:54 PM, Joe Lewis Wilkins wrote: If the docs don't clearly spell this out, they should. Hopefully, this 2.9 with the Doc fixes can add something as tiny, but important, as this. Actually, in this case it was reading about 'within' in the docs (a term I probably haven't looked up since my HyperCard days) that tipped me off to this distinction. Who knew you could actually learn new stuff from the docs! ;-) Devin On May 14, 2007, at 3:18 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote: Devin Asay wrote: In turns out all you have to do is use the within() function. That looks at the actual outline of the graphic instead of the rect. I didn't realize until today that the 'is within' operator and the 'within()' function have this subtle difference. Very cool. Whoa, I didn't know that either! What a nice surprise. :) -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | [EMAIL PROTECTED] HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.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 Devin Asay Humanities Technology and Research Support Center Brigham Young University ___ 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: Something to add to the Rev Docs
On 15 May 2007, at 00:54, Joe Lewis Wilkins wrote: If the docs don't clearly spell this out, they should. Hopefully, this 2.9 with the Doc fixes can add something as tiny, but important, as this. Joe Wilkins They don't. Probably due to it always behaving like that, even in rev 1.0 (dunno about hypercard). Yet, if you first read the within documentation, and then the is within documentation, you'll see that the differences are documented, there is just no explanation that they are not synonym, contrary to what most people would intuitively assume. -- official ChatRev page: http://chatrev.bjoernke.com Chat with other RunRev developers: go stack URL http://homepage.mac.com/bvg/chatrev1.3.rev; ___ 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
Print Word-docs to pdf on OS X by revolution (and applescript?)
Hello, I have a lot of word-files (with Footnotes), which I want to print to pdf on Mac OS X using the button in OSX-Print-Dialog. Can you tell me how to do? How to do it in Applescript? BTW: I learned with your help to use the shell command to convert doc to pdf, but that doesn´t work for doc-Files with Footnotes. Thank you in advance for yout thinking! Richard.___ 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: Print Word-docs to pdf on OS X by revolution (and applescript?)
Hi Richard, The solution should be something simple like set theFile to (choose file) tell application Microsoft Word to print theFile Best, Mark -- Economy-x-Talk Consultancy and Software Engineering http://economy-x-talk.com http://www.salery.biz Get your store on-line within minutes with Salery Web Store software. Download at http://www.salery.biz Op 27-mrt-2007, om 20:29 heeft R. Hillen het volgende geschreven: Hello, I have a lot of word-files (with Footnotes), which I want to print to pdf on Mac OS X using the button in OSX-Print-Dialog. Can you tell me how to do? How to do it in Applescript? BTW: I learned with your help to use the shell command to convert doc to pdf, but that doesn´t work for doc-Files with Footnotes. Thank you in advance for yout thinking! ___ 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
[DOCs] Missing Definition for backslash
Hi, before I write to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and indicate that there is no entry for '\' I just want to confirm that I'm not missing anything. There are plenty of code examples that run on to the second line but I just can't see anywhere where it spells out that that is what \ is used for. Also in the electronic DOCs Dictionary. You can do a search for \, but clicking on it, I don't get anything. If someone else can confirm, I'll submit. ___ 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: [DOCs] Missing Definition for backslash
Kay- Sunday, March 11, 2007, 5:37:34 PM, you wrote: If someone else can confirm, I'll submit. This is already BZ #3065. I just updated the version info - you might want to add a comment. -- -Mark Wieder [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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: [DOCs] Missing Definition for backslash
On 3/12/07, Mark Wieder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is already BZ #3065. I just updated the version info - you might want to add a comment. Thanks Mark. I tried using RevZilla 2.0.8 to search for appropriate bugs, but had some problems. Even when I enter 3065, I get and answer dialog:There were problems extracting data for this bug. Please try again. Doesn't matter how many tries, nothing. I went to the STS website but it's titled RevZilla 1.1.2.??? Ken, what is the latest version of RevZilla and where do I get it? mark, are you accessing BugZilla with RevZilla, and if so, what version. If not I guess I'll use the Browser interface. Thanks, Rev. 2.8.0 build 360 OSX 10.4.8 MacTel RevZilla 2.0.8 ___ 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: [DOCs] Missing Definition for backslash
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 10:27:44 +0800, Kay C Lan wrote: On 3/12/07, Mark Wieder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is already BZ #3065. I just updated the version info - you might want to add a comment. Thanks Mark. I tried using RevZilla 2.0.8 to search for appropriate bugs, but had some problems. Even when I enter 3065, I get and answer dialog:There were problems extracting data for this bug. Please try again. Doesn't matter how many tries, nothing. I went to the STS website but it's titled RevZilla 1.1.2.??? Ken, what is the latest version of RevZilla and where do I get it? The latest release version is 2.08, but it only worked with the old Rev Bugzilla site, so no one is currently using RevZilla to log bugs. I am working on a release 2.1, which is about 80% finished - I am hoping to have it in beta early this week, but in the meantime you'll have to use the Rev web site. 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: [DOCs] Missing Definition for backslash
On 3/12/07, Kay C Lan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I went to the STS website but it's titled RevZilla 1.1.2.??? Just to clarify, in RevZilla, I clicked on the 'About RevZilla' tab and then clicked on the little ? question mark icon. That took me to: http://www.sonsothunder.com/devres/revolution/downloads/RevZilla.htm which is the old v1.1.2. Going to the STS page and navigating to the downloads gets you to: http://www.sonsothunder.com/devres/revolution/downloads/RevZilla2.htm which is the latest version of RevZilla. Note the 2 at the end. Sorry for any confusion. Rev. 2.8.0 build 360 OSX 10.4.8 MacTel RevZilla 2.0.8 ___ 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: [DOCs] Missing Definition for backslash
On 3/12/07, Ken Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The latest release version is 2.08, but it only worked with the old Rev Bugzilla site, so no one is currently using RevZilla to log bugs. Ah, that would explain it:-) Thanks, look forward to 2.1. ___ 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: [DOCs] Missing Definition for backslash
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 10:45:26 +0800, Kay C Lan wrote: On 3/12/07, Kay C Lan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I went to the STS website but it's titled RevZilla 1.1.2.??? Just to clarify, in RevZilla, I clicked on the 'About RevZilla' tab and then clicked on the little ? question mark icon. That took me to: http://www.sonsothunder.com/devres/revolution/downloads/RevZilla.htm which is the old v1.1.2. Going to the STS page and navigating to the downloads gets you to: http://www.sonsothunder.com/devres/revolution/downloads/RevZilla2.htm which is the latest version of RevZilla. Note the 2 at the end. Whoops! Thanks for the catch, Kay... I'll fix that in the next version... 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: Saving App-Specific Docs
Thanks for the tips. What I'm primarily looking for is a way to store registration key/trial expiration data in a way that is least visible to the user. For an OS X application, is there a way to store this type of data in its plist file? If I store the data in a text file, regardless of encoding mechanism, the user could potentially find the file and delete it, thereby starting the trial period for the application anew. I noticed in a couple of Cocoa shareware apps that I tried, that if I deleted their pList files in Preferences, it did not affect their trial periods, i.e., a 10-day trial that had been down to 8-days remained at 8-days even though I deleted its corresponding plist file. In incidences like these, where is that data stored that says how much time is left on a trial or that the copy has already been registered? Many thanks, Trevor Hopkins Exeter, UK From: Richard Gaskin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: How to use Revolution use-revolution@lists.runrev.com To: How to use Revolution use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Subject: Re: Saving App-Specific Docs Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 07:56:07 -0700 Trevor Hopkins wrote: From a Rev application, how does one go about creating and writing to/reading from a document that is only openable by the Rev app itself (i.e., not a text document that anyone can open). I can see how to write data to a text document but what about to another type of doc that not anyone can get into so easily? There are many good options for protecting data. In addition to the other suggestions posted here, if your security needs are modest there's a very lightweight but reasonably efficient and easy-to-use encryption handler posted at RevJournal: http://www.revjournal.com/tutorials/handy-handlers-005.html Most more industrial strength encryption you might also consider Rev's Blowfish implementation, included in the Studio and Enterprise packages. -- Richard Gaskin Managing Editor, revJournal ___ Rev tips, tutorials and more: http://www.revJournal.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 _ Be the first to hear what's new at MSN - sign up to our free newsletters! http://www.msn.co.uk/newsletters ___ 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: Saving App-Specific Docs
Ooops, just noticed in the Docs, there's an encode function you can hijack. Cheers, Luis. Luis wrote: I suppose you could use a .rev file, and have the textual data embedded in it. I just tried opening a .rev file in TextEdit: Some things are readable, others are erm... weird. Other than that is create your own extension, like a mydoc.whatever and only read from those files with that extension: But you'd have to create your own 'encoding' in order for it to not be opened/understood by any other app. A text file can be opened by any text editor, regardless of the extension, so here is where encoding will obfuscate the data. Any bit shifting of the file data or shifting the character set would be the easiest way to do this, IMO. Just remember that you have to reverse the process to get the stuff back out! Cheers, Luis. Trevor Hopkins wrote: From a Rev application, how does one go about creating and writing to/reading from a document that is only openable by the Rev app itself (i.e., not a text document that anyone can open). I can see how to write data to a text document but what about to another type of doc that not anyone can get into so easily? Thanks in advance, Trevor Hopkins Exeter, UK _ Be the first to hear what's new at MSN - sign up to our free newsletters! http://www.msn.co.uk/newsletters ___ 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
