urns the bounding rect of the actual letters in the field
-- which is different from the formattedRect
-- based on a script by Scott Rossi
--
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/What-is-up-with-FormattedHeight-tt4360344.html#a4372671
lock screen
## CREATE IM
Actually, I may be wrong but I seem to recall the script I posted being a
variation of something written by Trevor DeVore. Just to keep the credits
rolling along...
Regards,
Scott Rossi
Creative Director
Tactile Media, UX Design
Recently, Howard Bornstein wrote:
> Wow, thank you Ken and Scott
Wow, thank you Ken and Scott. This was the direction I was planning on
pursuing for a solution, but the difference here is that it would have
taken me a month, whereas I'm sure Scott knocked this out in his head while
brushing his teeth before his morning cup of coffee. Awesome!
I appreciate every
Hi Ken:
The following function does what you propose using a transitional image and
gets pretty close. It requires the long id of the target field, and only
works on transparent fields. You'd have to add additional code to convert
the non-text portion of the field to alphaData, or temporarily co
On 06/02/2012 03:30, Howard Bornstein wrote:
I need to find the smallest rectangle that will enclose a line of text of
arbitrary text size in a field. I thought I could use formattedheight and
formattedwidth to do this but it doesn't seem to be working.
I'm very perplexed too.
Instead of worry
That makes sense. I was complaining about formattedHeight for fields. For
buttons it seems useful.
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Bob Sneidar wrote:
> One thing I use it for is programmatically setting the height of menu
> buttons. I find the default size to be too large for a busy form, so I s
One thing I use it for is programmatically setting the height of menu buttons.
I find the default size to be too large for a busy form, so I set the height to
the formattedHeight of the text of the button. I have a utility that "drops" a
field, button or menu onto a card and links it to a SQL co
Right. As I've been able to determine, the textheight is used to create the
leading and the formattedheight uses the font metrics, the textheight (if
set) and the field margins (if set).
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Bob Sneidar wrote:
> If you have ever had to edit type faces, you would see t
Thanks for your reply. As a graphic designer, I know about ascenders,
descenders, x-height, etc. However, I had thought that formattedHeight
adjusted the field height to the size of the text being displayed, not to
the min and max of the entire type face.
I created a field with the entire extended
If you have ever had to edit type faces, you would see that this space is
necessary. It used to be called leading (not lead as you would a dog but lead
as in a bit of lead inserted between lines of type in a press). Without
leading, type in a paragraph would be much more difficult to read. There
Howard,
> Why doesn't the formattedHeight of a field just do this automatically? Why
> does it include extra space at the top and bottom of the field?
> What are the relationships among text size, text height, and field height
> that will allow the field to adjust to exactly the size of the text
>
de (v1.4.1 released 26/08/2011)
--
View this message in context:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/What-is-up-with-FormattedHeight-tp4360344p4360697.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
use-livecode mailin
I need to find the smallest rectangle that will enclose a line of text of
arbitrary text size in a field. I thought I could use formattedheight and
formattedwidth to do this but it doesn't seem to be working.
The dictionary says about FormattedHeight:
Use the *formattedHeight* property to determi
13 matches
Mail list logo
