Christian Lippka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Thats not a good idea currently. Armin Le Grand is working hard to bring > primitive support for the drawing layer. Thats such a cool technology, I > hope he will blog about this soon. As soon as we can make use of this, > meta files are as obsolete as carrier pigeons. > That's right to the point - as there are still some rare occasions where you need carrier pigeons (and metafiles, accordingly - e.g. when you have one a a graphic, or an OLE).
> > When it comes to the animation system, some things are harder than > > others, and I would recommend pursuing the easy stuff before trying to > > rewrite the whole thing. Personally, I think the "Effect Options" are a > > good place to start, followed by motion paths, some exit animations, and > > some simple emphasis effects. The hard part here is understanding the > > internal OOo structures and how SMIL works to describe the animations > > and options. > I still thing that having a fresh start and using more scripted stuff > and not hard coding each effect is the way to go. But I'm easy persuaded > with good arguments here :) > I'm not - going that route leads to fragility and constant fixing efforts. IMO, the only sensible way is to implement the basic SMIL animation facilities using action script - which of course can also be implemented iteratively. Having hard-coded effects poses the problem of detecting them in your SMIL input, which is on the verge of implementing AI ;-) Cheers, -- Thorsten --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
