Have you tried it with a scoped queue?
{queue: {position:'end', scope: 'someName'}}
I haven't had problems chaining effects this way in the past (I
almost always use a scope).
Perhaps if you have a link to a full page I could tinker with your
source until it worked.
TAG
On Apr 17, 2007, at 7:36 PM, Jay K wrote:
>
> Hello,
> like many others I'm attempting to create a custom effect by chaining
> multiple other effects together, one after another. I'm having some
> trouble getting the behavior I expect from the EffectQueues page in
> the wiki:
> http://wiki.script.aculo.us/scriptaculous/show/EffectQueues
>
> I have two effects here, a Grow and a Pulsate:
>
> Effect.MyEffect = function(element) {
> element = $(element);
> Effect.Grow(element,
> { direction: 'top-left',
> duration: 5.0,
> queue: 'end'
> });
>
> Effect.Pulsate(element,
> {
> queue: 'end'
> });
> }
>
> With this code I only see the Grow and not the Pulsate. It doesn't
> make a difference if I switch the order of the two Effect
> declarations. If I add an alert as an 'afterFinish' event for the
> Pulsate effect, I see it as the page finishes loading, before the Grow
> happens, again independent of the order of the declarations.
>
> If I change "queue: 'end'" to, "queue: {position: 'end'}", which the
> wiki says is equivalent, I get this error:
> "Effect.Queues.get(typeof this.options.queue == "string" ? "global" :
> this.options.queue.scope) has no properties"
> which seems to indicate that the 'scope' variable has to be there if
> you define the 'queue' option as a hash.
>
> If I do specify the scope either as 'global' or as another value, I
> get the same behavior as in the first case. Am I missing something
> about the use of the queue?
>
> I tried the alternative method of including the second effect as the
> first effect's "afterFinish" callback, and that works as it should.
> If I'm not mistaken, this method, despite its drawbacks, is still in
> use in the Scriptaculous source code, for example in Effect.Shake,
> consisting of several Effect.Move's chained together in this manner.
> Perhaps there's a reason for that.
>
> Lastly, can someone set me straight on "Effect.Grow" vs. "new
> Effect.Grow"? I've seen conflicting information, some of which is
> probably out of date. And does this have anything to do with some
> effects being defined like this:
> Effect.Shake = function(element) { ...
> and some like this:
> Effect.Morph = Class.create();
> Object.extend(Object.extend(Effect.Morph.prototype,
> Effect.Base.prototype), { ...
>
> Thanks for any help you can offer. I'm using Scriptaculous 1.7.0 and
> Prototype 1.5.0.
> -Jay
>
>
> >
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby
on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
