I don't have a specific answer for this set of questions, but durning
a holiday week few may be available to answer.. so here goes.
I rarely use groups as backgrounds for my projects.
You may be in the land of
synonyms
backward compatible to HCard
oddities of groups
message path priorities
Note: (from the dictionary)
When referring to a group using the synonyms background, bkgnd, or bg,
the reference is to one among the groups in a stack, rather than to
one among the groups on a card.
For example, the object reference background 1 indicates the first
group in the current stack, not the lowest-layered group on the
current card.
-----
In my mind, 'behave like a background' does not mean become a
background object.
Groups can be shared, placed, and removed from any card in the stack
that contains the group.
The groups reside in the stack
... thus
- put the number of bgs of this stack = 2
is the same thing as saying
- put the number of groups of this stack = 2
(which is true in your case)
The other part of 'background' that is important is the message path.
Setting behavior to true should mean that its script is placed after
the card, rather than before the card. This is critical when
designing complex user interfaces. Others have discussed 'oddities'
when using nested groups and the message path. Perhaps they can chime
with their discoveries and techniques.
If all of the groups have their behavior set to false, then
backgroundnames = empty
Again, synonyms of 'group'
There can be 20 groups defined in a stack and not one of them placed
on any of the cards.
There can be 8 groups defined in a stack, all of them placed on every
card, but none of them specified as "background behavior" and none of
their scripts will occur after any of the card scripts.
Hope this leads you to clarity.
On Dec 30, 2010, at 1:31 AM, David Bovill wrote:
OK - it's morning and I still don't get it.
In my simple test stack, I have 3 groups and 3 cards. One of the
groups
(group "Inner") is inside another, and both top level groups (group
"First
background" and group "Second Nested Background") are on the first
card and
the last card, all though they have had their background behavior
set to
false.
The following are all true:
- put the backgroundnames of this stack = empty
- put the number of bgs of this stack = 2
- put the short name of background 1 of this stack = "First
background"
- put the short name of background 2 of this stack = "Inner"
It makes no sense that "the backgroundnames" is empty and the number
of bgs
= 2. It also makes no sense that the second bg is not the second top
level
group that is shared across several cards, but is an inner "group"
of a
nested background.
Can anyone make sense of this? I'm sure a bug like this would have
been
spotted before?
On 30 December 2010 00:02, David Bovill <da...@vaudevillecourt.tv>
wrote:
Now I'm lost...
You can even create backgrounds that are (almost) impossible to
detect. If
you create a top level group called "Hidden background" and then
"remove" it
from the card - it will appear in the backgroundids /
backgroundnames of the
stack even though it is not visible on any cards.
However if you then:
set the backgroundbehavior of bg "Hidden background" to false
it will not only not be visible, it won't show up in the
'backgroundids /
backgroundnames of the stack".
Looping through each background number by using "the number of
backgrounds
of stack" gives a completely different result, which at the moment
is making
no sense... for instance I have go a test stack with two shared
groups -
both of which I've turned off the backgroundbehavior (so the
backgroundnames
is empty) - no bg 1 of stack is the first group, but bg 2 of stack
is an
inner group and not the second shared group.... maybe it will make
sense in
the morning....
Jim Ault
Las Vegas
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
