0> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
0> saulgoode <URL:mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ("saulgoode") wrote:

saulgoode> 2. In a couple of places I employed the term "selection
saulgoode>    frame" in order to differentiate operations that affected the
saulgoode>    selection mask versus those that affected the selection's
saulgoode>    contents (e.g., 'script-fu-selection-rounded-rectangle' is
saulgoode>    described as "Round the corners of the current selection
saulgoode>    frame").  I feel that "selection frame" is more intuitive
saulgoode>    than "selection mask" in these contexts.

Other ideas: "selection boundary", "selection bounds", "selection
outline", "selection edge".  Do any of these make more sense?

saulgoode> 3. Many scripts will operate on the non-transparent portion
saulgoode>    of the active layer (i.e., where the alpha channel is not
saulgoode>    BLACK) if there is nothing selected.  I have termed these
saulgoode>    "alpha objects" and consistently employed the phrase "an
saulgoode>    alpha object or selection" to describe this situation. If
saulgoode>    a better terminology is proposed to describe this, it
saulgoode>    should be a simple matter to change these using "sed".

"Opaque" is the natural opposite of "transparent".  Does that help here?

saulgoode> 4) I do not understand what is happening with the
saulgoode>    'script-fu-gap-dup-continue' portion of the patch.  I
saulgoode>    only changed the blurb but for some reason the entire
saulgoode>    file is shown as added lines.  (The patch works, I just
saulgoode>    don't understand why.)

Wild guess, without looking at it - line-end conversion?
Gimp-developer mailing list

Reply via email to