My comments are inserted below.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Karl Becker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 2:04 PM
Subject: Re: Digest metacard.v004.n326
> > > ...But the rest of us need a more common English
reference
> >> and a bit of explanation.
> >>
> >> Where does one draw the line?
> >
> >With the destroyStack property. ;)
> >...
> >C++ programmers understand "destroy" and lay people
don't, but everyone
> >understands "purge" -- why not "purgeStack" and
"purgeWindow" properties?
>
> Highly agreed. This isn't the xTalk list, but this still
is of
> pretty big importance... I never have used the
destroyStack command
> (maybe because it sounded too scary, aside from the fact
that I
> probably didn't have a use for it) , but it always sounded
a little
> scary to me. Purge sounds much, much better... can we at
least get
> this used an a synonym in future releases?
>
> > > Where does one draw the line? I vote for syntax in
common terminology
> > > which the majority of people can understand.
Avoidance of technical
> >> jargon is important in an xtalk language. "Blend" is
technical jargon
> > > apparently familiar to graphic designers.
> >
> >But is "blend" really so technical? I want to "blend"
this image with
> >whatever is behind it. This doesn't sound like technical
jargon to me.
> >
> >I think you have a stronger case against: srcCopy,
notSrcAnd, noop,
> >notSrcXor, etc etc.
>
> Agreed as well. Can we simply have adjectives from now
on? I
> think MC need more workers so Scott can implement all this
;-)
>
> > > "Transparency" (or even
> >> "opacity") is self-explanatory to anyone. The same
jargon occurs with
> >> "alphaData" -- undoubtedly familiar to graphics
programmers, but not so
> >> familiar to us.
> >
> >I agree, but I think you might concur that alphaData is
more approachable
> >than the above terms.
>
=========== my starting point =========
> This may just be a naive guess of mine, but I'm guessing
most people
> using these properties will already be familiar with
things like
> alpha masks from various image-editing apps. If you're
using a
> pretty-high level property like this, you're probably also
familiar
> with graphics programs in general.
That's a significant point. Besides basic development
skills, a person (or dev team) must also have domain
knowledge (the graphic design domain) to use these
properties effectively.
Are there other MC controls that require other-domain
knowledge?
>From this, I extrapolate (read "go into the weeds"):
What is "programming for the rest of us" about? I think it's
about giving people (who aren't professional software
developers) tools to express and illustrate their ideas in
"living" {interactive, animated) form.
Many knowledge domains are quite complex. I suppose this
means that the tools used for expressing domain-related
concepts and ideas must be able to handle those
complexities.
FWIW.
Phil Davis
>
> >Would you be willing to post a short description of each
type of ink and
> >how it behaves? I would love to have the information and
I am sure many
> >others would too.
>
> This would be darn useful, but alas, I'm sure the only
person who
> knows this is the first bad guy who infiltrated some
scripting
> language's programming staff and tried to change the
english-sounding
> language to straight, abbreviation-filled code! ;-)
>
>
> --
> Karl Becker, KB Productions - http://www.karlbecker.com
> Featuring:New Tricks, Tiger's Eye Pub, and The Fishin'
Hole
>
> Archives:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
> Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm
> Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this
list.
>
>
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm
Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
