At 12:57 PM -0600 27/9/1999, Scott Raney wrote:
Thanks for the reply.
>> Wouldn't it be better to have automatic mouse-wheel support in fields
>> only if the field in question has a vertical scrollbar? (The
>> assumption being that fields without scrollbars will not be scrolled
>> in the conventional way, if at all.)
>
>Fields without scrollbars still scroll if you move the cursor or use
>find, so it doesn't seem to me that the new behavior isn't really
>inconsistent. Besides, storing non-visible stuff in fields is not a
>very efficient way to do things. Use custom properties instead.
> Regards,
> Scott
Yes, but... :)
The potential gotcha with the mouse-wheel is quite high. In the case
of moving the cursor, this is easily prevented by locking the field
(which is likely to be the case for fields with non-visible text and
no scroll bars). Find has to be implemented by the developer. But the
mouse-wheel behavior is always on. And unless you have a mouse-wheel
yourself, you may not know that this is happening. (Hands up those
who don't know their fields scroll when the mouse-wheel is turned!)
As for storing non-visible text in fieds, there must be many
practical uses. In my case, it is a multi-column list with
synchronized scrolling of fields. You can see the mouse-wheel effect
in the Metacard Example stack (Example 11). An automated scrolling
field (for rolling credits or whatever) could have the same problem.
I can live with the rawKeyDown approach to handling this, but it
seems more like a workaround than a solution.
Cheers
Dave Cragg
_____________________________________________
The LACS Centre (Business English Training Resources)
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.lacscentre.co.uk
_____________________________________________
