> I just got another idea how we could maybe solve
> this problem: We could add some sort of "layers" to
> FreeCard.
I like this idea, a lot!
> Every card and background may have one or
> more layers which may contain a number of parts.
> Parts are numbered uniquely only within a layer,
> and if you do not specify a layer,
> it defaults to the topmost one.
the number of parts of layer x of <card>
the number of parts of layer x of <bkgnd>
the number of parts of the topMost layer of <card>
the number of parts of the topMost layer of <bkgnd>
the number of parts of <card>
the number of parts of <bkgnd>
-- the last set is equivalent to the 2nd set
> When a HyperCard stack is converted to a FreeCard
> stack, every card or background receives two layers:
> one for the card/background picture, and one for all
> the parts. And since the parts are all in that one
> layer, and the card picture is in its own layer,
> the latter will not change the part numbers.
Excellent thinking, Uli. It's an elegant solution with
future but the really astute part of your idea is that
you have devised an easy path for legacy stacks that
doesn't compromise the future or the past. Wonderful!
> Since the pictures appear below the parts
> in HyperCard, the converter will use the layer that
> is topmost when evaluating the number of parts of
> this cd and will take it to mean the same as the
> number of parts of last layer of this cd.
The last layer being on top is not a readily obvious
notion to newbie users, even though we HC users are
sort of accustomed to that way of thinking, given that
"bring forward" and "send back" work that way, and
that new parts are always on TOP of the existing parts
too. Let's keep the "topMost" identifier in there
s.v.p.
> Advantages:
> -> Logically comprehensive and consistent use of
> objects
> -> Backward-compatibility to existing HyperCard
> stacks
> -> "Layers", a long-requested feature of many
> HyperCard users added smoothly
Right on!
> Disadvantages:
> -> "the number of parts of this cd" is not
> intuitive anymore, because people might expect it
> to return the number of parts in *all* layers.
You can't make an omelette if you don't break some
eggs, as they say. ;-)
> Oh man, this is really a tough one.
We will surely work something out :)
I like the format of your post, e.g. :
the idea
the advantages
the disadvantages
It lends itself well to decision-making based on
tradeoffs between the relative merits of each proposed
solution, and more generally communicating clearly to
everyone what are the implications of such-and-such a
decision, and possibly triggering a response from
someone that would annouce for example that they have
found a solution to one of the contraints that you
have identified.
Back to work,
Alain
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/
_______________________________________________
Freecard-general mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freecard-general
