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