date:20160301




On 2.03.2016 02:54, Alejandro Tejada wrote:

Hi Richmond


RM wrote

[SNIP]
In 1993 I ended up in a married student "cave" at Southern Illinois
University with an LC 475 on the desk in front of me and a screaming 7
month year old next to me (my wife had a Fulbright scholarship);
Hypercard probably prevented me from battering the baby to death!

Wow! HyperCard save lives too. :D


Indeed it did!

And I am quite sure that LiveCode could be leveraged to save lives in 
the form of a front-end

for cardiac-monitoring machines and so on!

R.



Last line of your message, reads
like an O'Henry short story:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O._Henry

How many language teachers knows that they could
use LiveCode to teach hypertext and creative writing?
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221267074_Hypertext_and_Creative_Writing

Alejandro




--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Re-The-Future-of-LiveCode-in-Education-tp4701642p4701810.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: beggars be choosers


Well, Bob, I wouldn't want to spoil my reputation, would I?

Although tinned duck sounds as though it might stick between the teeth 
somewhat.


I do hope that all the wobbly bits in DP15 get ironed out for RC1, even 
at the expense
of having to wait until New Year, which would be far better than having 
an RC which was a rush job.


Duck, Tin or what-have-ye, I am filing bug reports for LC 8.0; I hope 
you are, in between

the funny comments.

Richmond.

On 2.03.2016 01:18, Bob Sneidar wrote:

You'd just eat whatever was in it and then complain you still didn't have a tin.

Bob S


On Mar 1, 2016, at 09:57 , RM 
> wrote:

In our current development process, "Release Candidate" builds are exactly
what they say on the tin, i.e. once we release 8.0 RC 1, then 8.0 final
release will follow shortly after.

I'd like to register a formal complaint: when I downloaded the last release 
candidate I didn't get a tin.

Richmond.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: LC8DP15 feedback-IDE Issues


On 02/03/2016 00:08, J. Landman Gay wrote:

In the Project Browser, the dotted selections are the objects selected
on the card. You can't alter dotted-line selections from within the PB,
you need to open the property inspector for that.


You can double click on an item in the Project Browser to select it on 
the card.


  Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Open Source Team

LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Export & LC8 & Browser widget


> On 1 Mar 2016, at 23:29, Richard Gaskin  wrote:
> 
> Ever since the option was added to take a screen shot directly from an 
> object's rendered buffer I've been using that, since I get high-quality 
> results and can also work with objects not currently on screen.
> 
> Does this not work with widgets?:
> 
>  export snapshot from widget "Chart" to tVar as PNG


This does not work because a Browser widget is not a true LiveCode object.

The same problem as Ali Lloyd’s suggestion.


All the best

Terry



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Export & LC8 & Browser widget


> On 1 Mar 2016, at 23:11, Ali Lloyd  wrote:
> 
> I find I get the best results from export snapshot by using the following
> form:
> 
> export snapshot from rect (the rect of tObjectLongID) of tObjectLongID ...
> 
> So you might try
> 
> export snapshot from rect (the rect of widget "Chart") of widget "Chart" of
> this card to tVar as PNG
> 
> If that doesn't give you the correct image then there's definitely a bug
> somewhere.


This suggestion doesn’t work because the widget is a Browser widget and I 
believe the browser is not a true object
but a window overlay.


All the best


Terry
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code


On 01/03/2016 23:58, Robert Mann wrote:

== And lastly, the kafkaesque position vis a vis the use of both tools for
the same code. In  practice, can I code part of an application in the
community and part of it in the closed IDE. If not, please do precise if
there are markers somewhere that are used to track the IDE used.


Frankly, as long as you never give the application to anyone else, you 
can use whatever edition(s) of the IDE you like.  The GPL does not 
restrict *use* -- it only restricts distribution.


Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Open Source Team

LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code


> On 2 Mar 2016, at 5:06 PM, J. Landman Gay  wrote:
> 
> Two hypotheticals:
> 
> 1. I create a viewer app to display my original artwork as part of my 
> job-seeking resume. The viewer seems useful so I decide to distribute it to 
> others so they can make their own resumes. I include at least some of my 
> artwork in the distribution so that potential users can see how the app 
> works, but I don't want them to use my artwork in their own resumes. I decide 
> to license my artwork restrictively, but the viewer app is GPL. I would think 
> separate licensing in that case would be okay. The app doesn't depend on my 
> particular artwork, it only needs something to display. (I know I could 
> include media that is public domain instead, but that's not the point.)
> 
> 2. I create an app that teaches the history of medieval art. The artwork is 
> mostly public domain, but some of the illustrations, maps, whatever are my 
> own creations. The stack doesn't work without the media, and the text in the 
> app describes it. In that case I need to license everything as GPL because 
> the app isn't functional without the supporting files.
> 
> Yes?


I think wiser heads than mine need to answer this for 1.

Cheers

Monte
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code


On 3/1/2016 11:41 PM, Monte Goulding wrote:



On 2 Mar 2016, at 4:35 PM, J. Landman Gay
 wrote:

Does that sound right to all you guys who read up on this stuff?


I believe any media or other content (whether separate files or not)
distributed with the application and/or required to make it function
fully would need to be licensed in a GPL compatible license.


Two hypotheticals:

1. I create a viewer app to display my original artwork as part of my 
job-seeking resume. The viewer seems useful so I decide to distribute it 
to others so they can make their own resumes. I include at least some of 
my artwork in the distribution so that potential users can see how the 
app works, but I don't want them to use my artwork in their own resumes. 
I decide to license my artwork restrictively, but the viewer app is GPL. 
I would think separate licensing in that case would be okay. The app 
doesn't depend on my particular artwork, it only needs something to 
display. (I know I could include media that is public domain instead, 
but that's not the point.)


2. I create an app that teaches the history of medieval art. The artwork 
is mostly public domain, but some of the illustrations, maps, whatever 
are my own creations. The stack doesn't work without the media, and the 
text in the app describes it. In that case I need to license everything 
as GPL because the app isn't functional without the supporting files.


Yes?


--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: LC8DP15 feedback-IDE Issues


On 3/1/2016 8:32 PM, Mark Wieder wrote:

On 03/01/2016 04:08 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote:

On 3/1/2016 5:23 PM, Peter Haworth wrote:

Don't use the Project Browser so can't comment on the second issue


It's confusing, Ali had to explain it to me. I still mostly use the App
Browser because I need the column layout.

In the Project Browser, the dotted selections are the objects selected
on the card. You can't alter dotted-line selections from within the PB,
you need to open the property inspector for that.

The hilited lines are selections you've made directly in the PB. The
icons at the bottom act on those only. So you can click the icons at the
bottom to manage the PB-selections (the hilited lines) to resize or
align. The card-selected objects (dotted lines) won't change. If you
want the card selections to be acted on, you need to manually re-select
them in the PB so their lines are hilited as well as dotted.

The idea was to be able to select things in the PB that may not be in
view, even on totally different cards or stacks, and be able to work
with them without going there. Hilited lines indicate which objects will
be affected. This could be useful. On the other hand, there is now a
disconnect between visible selections on a card and objects you can act
on within the PB.

Selections also act slightly differently in the Property Inspector. It
used to be you could shift-click several objects and then double-click
any one of them to open the multi-object inspector. That doesn't work
now. Instead you double-click one object on the card to open its
inspector and then shift-click objects to add more. That causes the
alignment icon to appear at the top left of the inspector, and the other
icons will operate on all the selected objects.



I may have to print that out and hang it on the wall.
Wow - the IDE used to be somewhat intuitive.



I confess my first reaction was that LC needs an interface designer.

But once it was explained to me, I understood the problem: how to allow 
the PB to act on objects that are not on the current card, while still 
representing the selected objects that are.


Part of me thinks the dotted lines and the selected lines are backwards; 
dotted suggests inactive, and the objects on the card are actively 
selected. There's 15 years of IDE history that enforces the idea that 
selected card objects should be hilited in the PB. But...the objects 
that will be acted on by the PB are also "active" in a different sense; 
they are the ones that the PB will change. So I flip-flop. I'm not sure 
how it should work.


--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

> On 2 Mar 2016, at 4:35 PM, J. Landman Gay  wrote:
> 
> Does that sound right to all you guys who read up on this stuff?

I believe any media or other content (whether separate files or not) 
distributed with the application and/or required to make it function fully 
would need to be licensed in a GPL compatible license.

Cheers

Monte
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code


On 3/1/2016 9:53 PM, Robert Mann wrote:

If livecode's wants that all stacks and content made with the Community
version be fully GPL3 compatible,
all media used in a stack must be under a CC BY-SA 4.0 type license, which
is directly compatible with GPLv3.


I have been trying to follow this thread, not always successfully, but 
common sense tells me:


If your app stores media files separately on disk, they are not part of 
the app. They are just files that are loaded into the app. So if you 
have artwork, audio, video, etc. they can be stored on disk and licensed 
separately in whatever way you want.


The app itself, if developed with the community version, would have to 
be GPL. Other people who download your app could re-distribute it, alter 
it, and re-use it under the same GPL conditions. But they couldn't 
redistribute your media files as long as those files are licensed under 
their own, more restrictive license.


Does that sound right to all you guys who read up on this stuff?

--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

RE : issue of including copyrighted media into a stack.

<< The creators of the 
works retain copyright even as they offer specific rights with regard to 
distribution to others. 

No distribution license is a transfer of copyright.  Not in film, not in 
software. >>

So.. did my homework again, here come the details :

If livecode's wants that all stacks and content made with the Community
version be fully GPL3 compatible,
all media used in a stack must be under a CC BY-SA 4.0 type license, which
is directly compatible with GPLv3.

In my case, media would only be in NC (non commercial copyleft) thus, not
GPL3 compatible.
And worse, some audio work would even not be in CC but under "SACEM" rules
which is rather restricted and some other work under standard copyright not
CC. So definitively not GPL3 compatible.

So i'll just ask the boss I think. But interesting for all to know what can
be done and what cannot be done with the community version.







--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Open-source-closed-source-and-the-value-of-code-tp4701649p4701826.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

> On 2 Mar 2016, at 1:41 PM, Robert Mann  wrote:
> 
> So basically, all clients of any indie developer have to buy/get their own
> license for their product.

No as far as I’m aware clients only need to get their own license if they are 
also a developer. If the clients aren’t involved in the application other than 
brief, testing, artwork etc and aren’t using LC then they are unlikely to need 
a license. I often recommend it though if there is a good tester on the client 
end it is often helpful for them to have LiveCode available.

Cheers

Monte
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

OUps!! that IS DAMN CLEAR! By Jove!! 

So ok.. fine.. as one could rephrase the situation :

 2) if you do not make it public, than when you're ready, you're free to 

a) buy a closed commercial license

and THEN
b) turn  for help to an indie/pro developer to finish it up and prepare it
for iOS  launch under whatever license suites you. 

So basically, all clients of any indie developer have to buy/get their own
license for their product.
Tough, but Ok It's best to know in advance.

Well, that closes that subject for me // thanks everybody.
(i'll try to make a summary of that discussion, issues and solutions to make
good use of this NRJ)



--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Open-source-closed-source-and-the-value-of-code-tp4701649p4701822.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

2016-03-01 Thread Jim Lambert


> MonteG wrote:
> Well.. it depends on what he’s apologising for ;-)

LOL!

JimL
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

> On 2 Mar 2016, at 1:57 PM, Jim Lambert  wrote:
> 
>> Whether I buy flowers for my wife because I think she's pretty or because 
>> I'm 
>> trying to apologize, either way the florist makes $60.
> 
> Either way Tiffany is one lucky gal!

Well.. it depends on what he’s apologising for ;-)
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

2016-03-01 Thread Jim Lambert


> RichardG wrote:
> 
> Whether I buy flowers for my wife because I think she's pretty or because I'm 
> trying to apologize, either way the florist makes $60.

Either way Tiffany is one lucky gal!

Jim Lambert

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

Robert Mann wrote:

> RE : issue : does livecode consider that all illustrative material
> & text etc in a stack to their view fall under GPL

I had thought Mark Waddingham had addressed that.  When media is related 
to the functionality, such as an icon, that would seem reasonable to 
expect that it be included as part of the governed work.

If the media is incidental to the app, or more clearly if it's even 
physically external to the app, you should be able to remove it if you 
don't want to share that, in the same way that you can make a word 
processor and you're not obliged to include the poetry you typed with it 
while you were working on it.

> in my case I've got a project that is related to "publishing" some
> music practice apps.
> So cards that contain audio elements, and copyright material like
> songs, music scores and also pictures, videos & texts (subject to
> copyright).

Ah, at last something specific and concrete!  Thank you.  The 
abstractions had become boggling.

Why not just do what other apps do and separate your content from your 
functionality.  Then you can share your app as a functional thing with 
content that's interchangeable.  This may also just be a useful way to 
architect, allowing you to build one system that can accommodate any 
number of titles.

> So all coding would be available to all of course. But these
> copyrighted elements will not be GPL compatible because as simple
> as it is french law does not allow an author to push away his
> copyrights.

The French have made some of the finest films in the world, and I'm able 
to know this because they were distributed here.  The creators of the 
works retain copyright even as they offer specific rights with regard to 
distribution to others.

No distribution license is a transfer of copyright.  Not in film, not in 
software.

> 1) what seems to be important is the timing of making publicly
> available some code :
> -- if you "release" some code under GPL for testing out an app
> -- and than later on turn to the closed IDE to produce a closed
> version in view of a commercial development
> ..if I get it right, you're done! bad choice :: GPL infringement!

A choice is license is not in itself either "good" or "bad"; we choose 
our licenses according to our goals.  When the goal is to share, the GPL 
can be a good choice.

But this is not about timing, but of distributed material:  if you 
distribute the GPL-governed engine, it's governed by the GPL.

What you do in your own home is your own business; what we're discussing 
here is distribution, and it matters less when you distribute than what 
you distribute.

--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web

 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

> On 2 Mar 2016, at 1:10 PM, Robert Mann  wrote:
> 
> 2) if you do not make it public, than when you're ready, you're free to turn
> for help to an indie/pro developer to finish it up and prepare it for iOS
> launch under whatever license suites you.

I refer you to clauses 5 b, d, f and h of the LiveCode License Agreement for 
Indy and Business. This sentence in 5b is particularly relevant "For the 
avoidance of doubt, You may not use the Licensed Edition to create or 
distribute Created Software for other users who are using the Community Edition 
of LiveCode.”

Here’s all of clause 5 for your reading pleasure:

5. NO COMPETITION

a) The clauses in this section are intended to prevent you from using the 
Licensed Edition to release Created Software or engage in activity using the 
Licensed Edition, that is directly damaging to our business. Such damage may 
result from any activity that reduces, or negates, the requirement for other 
users of any edition of LiveCode, including the Community Edition, to purchase 
a Licensed Edition in order to enjoy the same benefits that you enjoy under 
this agreement.

b) The ability to create and distribute Created Software is intended for You to 
use with applications You have created or been substantially involved in 
developing. You are prohibited from using the Licensed Edition to build 
standalone applications for others where You are not the author of the 
application, or confer on others the ability to build standalone applications 
by any means whatsoever. For the avoidance of doubt, You may not use the 
Licensed Edition to create or distribute Created Software for other users who 
are using the Community Edition of LiveCode. This clause is intended to prevent 
You from providing any facility or service which would reduce or eliminate the 
requirement for other LiveCode users, including users of the Community Edition, 
to purchase a Licensed Edition to distribute their own Created Software.

c) You are prohibited from creating or distributing Created Software to be used 
and marketed as a generic rapid application development tool. Any Created 
Software that does not involve any sort of script editing will not be 
considered prohibited.

d) You are prohibited from using the Licensed Edition to password protect or 
otherwise secure LiveCode stacks substantially created by anyone other than You.

e) You are prohibited from creating or distributing Created Software with the 
primary purpose of being used as a generic Player application for Created 
Software built with any edition of LiveCode. This clause is intended to prevent 
you from conferring the ability to others to distribute closed-source 
applications, including stacks, without purchasing a license.

f) Irrespective of the specific exclusions listed in this section, you may not 
invent, contrive or enter into any form of business that utilizes your Licensed 
Edition to reduce or eliminate the need for any other entity to purchase a 
Licensed Edition. Selling licenses is the core of our business and you accept 
that your use of the Created Software will not be used, intentionally or 
otherwise, to undermine that business.

g) Irrespective of the clauses above, any Created Software that you produce 
that requires the end user to purchase a Licensed Edition of the LiveCode 
Software will never be considered as being prohibited.

h) In the event that either you or LiveCode Ltd determines that your software, 
or a service you provide, is in violation of any of the clauses above, you must 
withdraw the Created Software or service immediately. It is agreed that 
engaging in such competition with the LiveCode product could cause irreparable 
harm and injury and LiveCode Ltd will be entitled, in addition to any other 
rights and remedies it may have at law or in equity, to an interdict, 
injunction or other similar relief enjoining or restraining you from doing or 
continuing to distribute such Created Software or provide such competing 
service. 

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

> On 2 Mar 2016, at 12:58 PM, Robert Mann  wrote:
> 
> So all coding would be available to all of course. But these copyrighted
> elements will not be GPL compatible because as simple as it is french law
> does not allow an author to push away his copyrights.

Perhaps you are confused between copyright and licensing here? The copyright 
owners of the content (if they are not you) need to license the content to you 
under a GPL compatible license so that you can then include their work in your 
GPL compatible application. They and you still retain copyright but the license 
permits the receiver to modify and redistribute the work.

Cheers

Monte
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

Ok, fine.. that is.. somehow more "logical" !!

So that leads to 2 practical consequences :

1) what seems to be important is the timing of making publicly available
some code :
-- if you "release" some code under GPL for testing out an app
-- and than later on turn to the closed IDE to produce a closed version in
view of a commercial development
..if I get it right, you're done! bad choice :: GPL infringement!

2) if you do not make it public, than when you're ready, you're free to turn
for help to an indie/pro developer to finish it up and prepare it for iOS
launch under whatever license suites you.

Conclusion :: with the community version, be secretive if in view of any
commercial application and only share  code you really wish to.. share!
There will be NO return.

So that closes that issue for me // 



--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Open-source-closed-source-and-the-value-of-code-tp4701649p4701816.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: LC8DP15 feedback-IDE Issues

2016-03-01 Thread Mark Wieder


On 03/01/2016 04:08 PM, J. Landman Gay wrote:

On 3/1/2016 5:23 PM, Peter Haworth wrote:

Don't use the Project Browser so can't comment on the second issue


It's confusing, Ali had to explain it to me. I still mostly use the App
Browser because I need the column layout.

In the Project Browser, the dotted selections are the objects selected
on the card. You can't alter dotted-line selections from within the PB,
you need to open the property inspector for that.

The hilited lines are selections you've made directly in the PB. The
icons at the bottom act on those only. So you can click the icons at the
bottom to manage the PB-selections (the hilited lines) to resize or
align. The card-selected objects (dotted lines) won't change. If you
want the card selections to be acted on, you need to manually re-select
them in the PB so their lines are hilited as well as dotted.

The idea was to be able to select things in the PB that may not be in
view, even on totally different cards or stacks, and be able to work
with them without going there. Hilited lines indicate which objects will
be affected. This could be useful. On the other hand, there is now a
disconnect between visible selections on a card and objects you can act
on within the PB.

Selections also act slightly differently in the Property Inspector. It
used to be you could shift-click several objects and then double-click
any one of them to open the multi-object inspector. That doesn't work
now. Instead you double-click one object on the card to open its
inspector and then shift-click objects to add more. That causes the
alignment icon to appear at the top left of the inspector, and the other
icons will operate on all the selected objects.



I may have to print that out and hang it on the wall.
Wow - the IDE used to be somewhat intuitive.

--
 Mark Wieder
 ahsoftw...@gmail.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

RE : issue : does livecode consider that all illustrative material & text etc
in a stack to their view fall under GPL

<< I suppose if your goal was to write LiveCode scripts and publish them as
a printed volume for your coffee table that might make a very good analogy.
>>

No, in my case I've got a project that is related to "publishing" some music
practice apps.
So cards that contain audio elements, and copyright material like songs,
music scores
and also pictures, videos & texts (subject to copyright).

So all coding would be available to all of course. But these copyrighted
elements will not be GPL compatible because as simple as it is french law
does not allow an author to push away his copyrights.

Hence the question above. Does livecode "interprets" all contents as being
per se GPL work when "attached" to a stack in the community version?

And I'm sure that the answer will interest more than one person. And for me
I just have to know where I put my feet. it' not just for the sake of making
a fuss about something, and I thank you for.. getting the feel of the air on
the subject. We have to know that.

--
View this message in context:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Open-source-closed-source-and-the-value-of-code-tp4701649p4701814.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

Robert Man wrote:
> == And lastly, the kafkaesque position vis a vis the use of both
> tools for the same code. In  practice, can I code part of an
> application in the community and part of it in the closed IDE.

The GPL is a distribution license; it doesn't affect anything you do in 
your home or office, and only comes into play when software is distributed.

In fact, one of the nice features of the GPL is that it very explicitly 
states that if you share software under that license you can't restrict 
the use of the software in any way.  This freedom is often 
under-appreciated but very powerful, as it prevents any form of 
discrimination and allows everyone to study and learn from code, and to 
modify it for themselves however they like.

So here we're only looking at cases where you distribute something to 
others.

And since the application needs an engine to bind to in order to run, 
the license of the engine used at build time would determine the license 
options.

Kevin's said here before that you can freely use the Community Edition 
to develop in, and would only truly need to acquire a license for the 
proprietary engine when you're ready to deploy the app and wish to do so 
under a license other than GPL.

For other questions the FAQ has some good info - see "Can you give me 
some examples of where I do and don’t need a commercial license?"

> If not, please do precise if there are markers somewhere that
> are used to track the IDE used.

Markers are for enforcement, and enforcement is only needed when there 
is circumvention.

I have no interest in circumventing the intentions of the copyright 
owner of LiveCode, so it's never occurred to me to look for markers.

--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web

 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

Matt Maier wrote:

> Unless Livecode modified the GPL it's still a Free software license,
> written and interpreted by the FSF. Calling it Open Source is more
> colloquial, and clearly doesn't cause problems in the vast majority of
> cases. But, in this case, the inaccuracy is causing the confusion.

I think the confusion in this long thread is evidently broader that just 
the specific downstream aspects of the GPL. :)

But yes, the distinction is sometimes useful.  For myself, acknowledging 
how broadly "open source" is used to describe the superset, when I need 
to distinguish GPL-like provisions I tend to use "copy-left".

I'm from California.  Here we say "soda", while my friends from Iowa say 
"pop".  When discussing the differences between Glenlivet and Pepsi, 
whether I refer to the Pepsi as "soda" or "pop" is the smaller concern. 
 Either way, the reader knows they'll be able to drive after polishing 
off a bottle. :)

> It's worth noting that most of the repositories in Github don't have
> any license at all. That's not colloquial, that's just lazy, but that
> also doesn't cause a problem in the vast majority of cases.

Au contraire, mon ami - it's been a problem for years:

That is, it's a problem if the code is useful. If the code is trivial 
nobody cares, but when it does something useful then having no declared 
license is a poison pill for both use and contribution.  No sane person 
would commit their business to using code that has no disclosed license 
terms.

That's an ongoing challenge with online venues like mailing lists and 
forums, and for myself when there's no declaration I only use code where 
I know the person who posted it and have a reasonably good understanding 
of their intentions.

When I don't know the poster's intentions I follow the old rule, "when 
in doubt leave it out."

> I feel like it's important for people working through the nuances
> of FOSS to understand the intent behind the different licenses. It
> can be disorienting to think that everybody is just sharing stuff
> and then to run into the seemingly harsh restrictions of the Free
> software subset. Open Source is pretty inviting. Free places stick
> limits on who is invited. It's confusing to people who haven't
> studied it because "open source" literally means open up the source
> from which the object was derived.

Definitely every bit as valuable to study as the proprietary licenses we 
encounter.  All legal documents require time to review and asses, and 
discuss their implications.

I won't hold it against if you use "free", but I'll still use "copy-left".

Just fergawsakes call it "Ubuntu GNU/Linux!" :)

> However, "free/libre" doesn't mean make it as free as possible,
> it means make it impossible for anyone to ever make it un-free.
> So the "free/libre" label actually brings along MORE restrictions.

That last sentence is an excellent example of why study is useful:

What you refer to as "restrictions" the authors of the GPL call "freedoms".

Both are descriptive, and indeed describe the same things, so who am I 
to say which is best?

I try to use value-neutral terms when discussing such things, sometimes 
using phrases like "downstream provisions".

I have no problem with "requirements" myself, but I am more apt to use 
"freedom" than "viral": if nothing else "freedom" is not an inherently 
offensive word (kinda nice, actually) but many have expressed that they 
find "viral" offensive when it's applied to GPL terms, connoting a 
disease while many who choose it feel it's a cure.

I just try to be respective of local cultures in my travels.

--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web

 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: LC8 DP15 error message?

2016-03-01 Thread Paul Hibbert

I’ve just reported a similar problem.  Bug# 17048 [ 
http://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=17048 ] Please feel free to add 
your comments.

Paul

> On Mar 1, 2016, at 5:07 PM, William Prothero  wrote:
> 
> Folks:
> I’m getting a long list of lines in the message box when I run my app. I’m 
> creating text boxes in code. Among a lot of the lines, there is:
> 
> ERROR: Error when sending message ideNewControl:
> 
> Would this be an IDE bug, or mine? My app works as expected, so ??
> Bill
> 
> Is this something I should be concerned about? Is it an IDE error, or mine?
> 
> From top down, here are a few of the lines:
> 
> ERROR: Error when sending message ideNewControl:
> 
> 89,2654,1
> 
> 69,2654,1,graphic id 74731 of group id 69783 of card id 1002 of stack 
> "/Users/prothero/Oceanography Projects/LiveCode-RunRev Projects/PT_Explorer 
> Projects/EarthExplorer_CurrentWkg/appStacks/datastacks/Map Display.livecode"
> 
> 676,2654,1
> 
> 241,2654,1,revIDEControlProperties
> 
> 353,0,0,stack "/Applications/LiveCode Indy 8.0 (dp 
> 15).app/Contents/Tools/Toolset/libraries/revidelibrary.8.livecodescript"
> 
> 219,1788,8,revIDEControlProperties
> 
> 465,1788,8
> 
> 241,1788,1,addControlToProjectBrowser
> 
> 353,0,0,stack "/Applications/LiveCode Indy 8.0 (dp 
> 15).app/Contents/Tools/Toolset/palettes/project 
> browser/revprojectbrowserbehavior.livecodescript"
> 
> 573,118,1,addControlToProjectBrowser
> 
> 253,118,1
> 
> 253,118,1
> 
> 241,113,1,ideNewControl
> 
> 353,0,0,stack "/Applications/LiveCode Indy 8.0 (dp 
> 15).app/Contents/Tools/Toolset/palettes/project 
> browser/revprojectbrowserbehavior.livecodescript"
> 
> 675,1733,1,ideNewControl
> 
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: The Future of LiveCode in Education

2016-03-01 Thread Alejandro Tejada

Hi Richmond


RM wrote
> [SNIP]
> In 1993 I ended up in a married student "cave" at Southern Illinois 
> University with an LC 475 on the desk in front of me and a screaming 7 
> month year old next to me (my wife had a Fulbright scholarship);
> Hypercard probably prevented me from battering the baby to death!

Wow! HyperCard save lives too. :D

Last line of your message, reads
like an O'Henry short story:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O._Henry

How many language teachers knows that they could 
use LiveCode to teach hypertext and creative writing?
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221267074_Hypertext_and_Creative_Writing

Alejandro




--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Re-The-Future-of-LiveCode-in-Education-tp4701642p4701810.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

LC8 DP15 error message?

2016-03-01 Thread William Prothero

Folks:
I’m getting a long list of lines in the message box when I run my app. I’m 
creating text boxes in code. Among a lot of the lines, there is:

ERROR: Error when sending message ideNewControl:

Would this be an IDE bug, or mine? My app works as expected, so ??
Bill

Is this something I should be concerned about? Is it an IDE error, or mine?

From top down, here are a few of the lines:

ERROR: Error when sending message ideNewControl:

89,2654,1

69,2654,1,graphic id 74731 of group id 69783 of card id 1002 of stack 
"/Users/prothero/Oceanography Projects/LiveCode-RunRev Projects/PT_Explorer 
Projects/EarthExplorer_CurrentWkg/appStacks/datastacks/Map Display.livecode"

676,2654,1

241,2654,1,revIDEControlProperties

353,0,0,stack "/Applications/LiveCode Indy 8.0 (dp 
15).app/Contents/Tools/Toolset/libraries/revidelibrary.8.livecodescript"

219,1788,8,revIDEControlProperties

465,1788,8

241,1788,1,addControlToProjectBrowser

353,0,0,stack "/Applications/LiveCode Indy 8.0 (dp 
15).app/Contents/Tools/Toolset/palettes/project 
browser/revprojectbrowserbehavior.livecodescript"

573,118,1,addControlToProjectBrowser

253,118,1

253,118,1

241,113,1,ideNewControl

353,0,0,stack "/Applications/LiveCode Indy 8.0 (dp 
15).app/Contents/Tools/Toolset/palettes/project 
browser/revprojectbrowserbehavior.livecodescript"

675,1733,1,ideNewControl


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Cleaning out the profile menu in Standalone settings

2016-03-01 Thread John Dixon

In the standalone settings...
Under the 'Basic Application Settings' there is the 'Profile' popUpMenu

I have noticed that there are profiles in there that are way out of date
Anyone know how I can clean up this menu and just show what is current ?
  
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

2016-03-01 Thread Matt Maier

Unless Livecode modified the GPL it's still a Free software license,
written and interpreted by the FSF. Calling it Open Source is more
colloquial, and clearly doesn't cause problems in the vast majority of
cases. But, in this case, the inaccuracy is causing the confusion.

It's worth noting that most of the repositories in Github don't have any
license at all. That's not colloquial, that's just lazy, but that also
doesn't cause a problem in the vast majority of cases. Still, when there is
a problem the only way to resolve it is to be more specific.

I feel like it's important for people working through the nuances of FOSS
to understand the intent behind the different licenses. It can be
disorienting to think that everybody is just sharing stuff and then to run
into the seemingly harsh restrictions of the Free software subset. Open
Source is pretty inviting. Free places stick limits on who is invited. It's
confusing to people who haven't studied it because "open source" literally
means open up the source from which the object was derived. However,
"free/libre" doesn't mean make it as free as possible, it means make it
impossible for anyone to ever make it un-free. So the "free/libre" label
actually brings along MORE restrictions.

Livecode picked a Free software license for the Community edition,
signaling that they want their community to adhere to the intent of Free
software. Part of the reason (not the whole reason, but part of it) I
upgraded to Indy was so that I could cast off the restrictions imposed by
the intent of Free software.

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:24 PM, Richard Gaskin 
wrote:

> Matt Maier wrote:
>
> > Robert, as you conduct your research you should also learn about the
> > difference between Free Software and Open Source Software. In brief,
> > Free Software does special things for moral reasons; it is "right"
> > that software be liberated. Open Source Software does special things
> > for pragmatic reasons; it is "useful" that software be easy to use
> > without asking permission.
>
> While that accurately reflects the motivations of Richard Stallman and
> others who create and promote "Free software" as they've described in their
> own writings, motivations are separate from outcomes.   Whether I buy
> flowers for my wife because I think she's pretty or because I'm trying to
> apologize, either way the florist makes $60. :)
>
> It's fully possible for others to enjoy the same outcomes without the same
> philosophical motivation.
>
> All carp are fish, but not all fish are carp, and not all who choose the
> GPL are quite as religious about it as others, or see it as any sort of
> moral imperative at all.
>
> For myself, and many I know, the GPL is a purely practical means to an
> end:  a good choice when one wants to share code both directly and also
> downstream.
>
> I participate in many software projects, and some of the choose GPL.  As
> much as I admire Mr. Stallman personally and professionally I disagree with
> his view of a moral imperative in choosing GPL.  But that disagreement
> doesn't prevent me from choosing it myself, or having enjoyed his company
> over dinner.  Vive le difference.
>
> Like the classical Chinese painting "Three Men at Tiger Brook", we can
> travel together even if we're adhere to different philosophies.
>
>
>
> > The GNU General Public License (GPL) is not an Open Source license,
> > it is a Free license. For reference, here is the Free Software
> > Foundation's stance on Open Source
> > http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html
> > "...a license designed specifically to protect freedom for all users
> > of a program."
> ...
> > It doesn't help that Livecode always uses the term "Open Source" when
> > referring to the Community Edition. This could easily (and does) lead
> > people to assume the Community Edition has an Open Source license. It
> > doesn't, so if you're looking for pragmatic terms, rather than
> > idealistic terms, you're going to be confused.
>
> With all due respect to both yourself and Mr. Stallman, what you wrote
> there is correct in terms of his very specific language preferences but not
> necessarily reflective of common usage.
>
> We have a bug in the English language:  we have only "free", but Latin has
> "gratis" distinct from "libre".
>
> So when we refer to "free software", we often have to add
> "free-as-in-freedom" or "free-as-in-beer" to distinguish what we mean.
>
> It's quite true that Mr. Stallman has said many times that he feels Eric
> Raymond's efforts to promote "open source" are misleading, and perhaps even
> "immoral", and strongly prefers "free" to distinguish GPL-governed works.
>
> It's also true that when I say "Ubuntu" Mr. Stallman would prefer (and not
> entirely without good reason) that I say "Ubuntu GNU/Linux".
>
> But that's what happens with language:  where phrases are cumbersome they
> evolve into more casual colloquial forms over time.
>
> Today "open

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

Robert Mann wrote:
> Coming back to Livecode OS I'm really surprised that nobody seem to have
> considered stacks as being not only programs but multimedia interactive
> media, and the related legal stuff like copyright of these sources.
>
> That is the basic in any book publishing   see :
> 
https://authorservices.wiley.com/permissions%20guidelines%20for%20authors%20pdf.pdf

> https://copyright.lib.utexas.edu/ccmcguid.html
>
> And the GPL inclusion of these elements cannot be governed by the GPL
> license which only covers CODE.
>
> Again if live code see it or interpret it differently please do say so.

I suppose if your goal was to write LiveCode scripts and publish them as 
a printed volume for your coffee table that might make a very good analogy.

More commonly code is used to execute instructions on a computer, and 
for that it needs to intimately co-mingle in memory with the LiveCode 
engine.

My earlier post I'd linked to previously was perhaps a bit long - let me 
share the most relevant portion from the Drupal License FAQ page:

"If I write a module or theme, do I have to license it under
 the GPL?
 Yes. Drupal modules and themes are a derivative work of Drupal.
 If you distribute them, you must do so under the terms of the
 GPL version 2 or later."

The sole copyright owners of LiveCode have expressed their intention 
that stack files are considered "derivative works", and choosing the GPL 
to express that intention seems in line with the collective counsel at 
the Wordpress, Joomla, and Drupal projects.

If you're able to convince counsel on those projects to change their 
interpretation of the GPL please let us know.

> So far : I have both a commercial and a a Community Edition (yes no
> more open source!),
> and I can write on one and then open and keep writing on the other.
> I mean, there is no way to identify the tool used!!!

Yes, as with proprietary software it's often physically possible to 
circumvent international copyright law with unauthorized distribution, 
just as it's possible to sell a stolen television at a pawn shop. 
Indeed, a few Wifi router vendors have found themselves in court for 
using a modified Linux kernel for which they did not share their source. 
Piracy comes in many forms.

But I believe there's a mandate on this list to avoid discussions that 
might promote illegal activity, so I'll not pursue this further beyond 
noting this:

The proprietary engine is not a binary copy of the Community Edition 
engine, as it contains code to encrypt stacks.  As such, while nothing 
can stop someone from pirating any software, if found it would be 
trivial to demonstrate in court which engine was used.

> Besides, dual licensing of the same work is fine. That one leaves
> me.. dead in kafka"s chaos!!

Again, not all that deep:  under the nearly-globally-recognized Berne 
Convention, the creator of an original work has ownership of that work 
at the moment of creation, and has sole authority over how that work may 
be used and/or distributed.

If you wish to write something similar to LiveCode from your own C 
source, you would own the work and have sole authority over its 
distribution terms, which may be under a single license, or a dozen, as 
you choose.

But when you create a work derived from another's, your ownership is 
limited to the portions you created, and may have further limitations 
depending on the terms of the software used to develop and run the work.

LiveCode stack files can be distributed under a wide range of possible 
licenses when created with the proprietary-licensed LiveCode engine, 
provided of course the terms of whichever license you choose are 
compatible with the terms of the LiveCode proprietary EULA.

For example, the MetaCard IDE was released under MIT License by the 
original inventor of the engine, Dr. Scott Raney, and many of us 
contributed to its maintenance and enhancement for years.

But you do not have source code to the proprietary engine, so it would 
not be possible to use any license that requires you to distribute the 
complete source code for an application.

If your original work is a stack file and it was made with the 
proprietary LC engine, you could conceivably make it available under MIT 
license, Apache, and your own proprietary license as well, and let your 
users choose the license they feel best meets their needs.

But if you want to include the engine, you'll need the source.

And the source is only publicly available under one license, the GPL.

--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web

 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe,

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

Mark Waddingham covered this in his post:

Whilst the GPL can be used to cover content there are more (GPL compatible) 
suitable ones. The main problem with applying the GPL to content is deciding 
what constitutes the 'source code'. Indeed, I believe there is an FAQ on the 
FSF site about such things but I can't find it at the moment (slow internet 
connection on a train!). Generally the Creative Commons style licenses are far 
better for content - you just need to pick a variant which is definitely 
compatible with the GPL (CC/0, for example).

Sent from my iPhone

> On 2 Mar 2016, at 10:58 AM, Robert Mann  wrote:
> 
> == Remains to be cleared the position vis a vis content (audio, video, text,
> images) what is the position of the creators? Can it be clarified? Did they
> mean that all content be, in their interpretation, included in the GPL? Is
> that written up somewhere in a specific proviso or just "thought" ?

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

Matt Maier wrote:

> Robert, as you conduct your research you should also learn about the
> difference between Free Software and Open Source Software. In brief,
> Free Software does special things for moral reasons; it is "right"
> that software be liberated. Open Source Software does special things
> for pragmatic reasons; it is "useful" that software be easy to use
> without asking permission.

While that accurately reflects the motivations of Richard Stallman and 
others who create and promote "Free software" as they've described in 
their own writings, motivations are separate from outcomes.   Whether I 
buy flowers for my wife because I think she's pretty or because I'm 
trying to apologize, either way the florist makes $60. :)

It's fully possible for others to enjoy the same outcomes without the 
same philosophical motivation.

All carp are fish, but not all fish are carp, and not all who choose the 
GPL are quite as religious about it as others, or see it as any sort of 
moral imperative at all.

For myself, and many I know, the GPL is a purely practical means to an 
end:  a good choice when one wants to share code both directly and also 
downstream.

I participate in many software projects, and some of the choose GPL.  As 
much as I admire Mr. Stallman personally and professionally I disagree 
with his view of a moral imperative in choosing GPL.  But that 
disagreement doesn't prevent me from choosing it myself, or having 
enjoyed his company over dinner.  Vive le difference.

Like the classical Chinese painting "Three Men at Tiger Brook", we can 
travel together even if we're adhere to different philosophies.

> The GNU General Public License (GPL) is not an Open Source license,
> it is a Free license. For reference, here is the Free Software
> Foundation's stance on Open Source
> http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html
> "...a license designed specifically to protect freedom for all users
> of a program."
...
> It doesn't help that Livecode always uses the term "Open Source" when
> referring to the Community Edition. This could easily (and does) lead
> people to assume the Community Edition has an Open Source license. It
> doesn't, so if you're looking for pragmatic terms, rather than
> idealistic terms, you're going to be confused.

With all due respect to both yourself and Mr. Stallman, what you wrote 
there is correct in terms of his very specific language preferences but 
not necessarily reflective of common usage.

We have a bug in the English language:  we have only "free", but Latin 
has "gratis" distinct from "libre".

So when we refer to "free software", we often have to add 
"free-as-in-freedom" or "free-as-in-beer" to distinguish what we mean.

It's quite true that Mr. Stallman has said many times that he feels Eric 
Raymond's efforts to promote "open source" are misleading, and perhaps 
even "immoral", and strongly prefers "free" to distinguish GPL-governed 
works.

It's also true that when I say "Ubuntu" Mr. Stallman would prefer (and 
not entirely without good reason) that I say "Ubuntu GNU/Linux".

But that's what happens with language:  where phrases are cumbersome 
they evolve into more casual colloquial forms over time.

Today "open source" is often used to describe all software whose source 
is both available to the recipient of the software and where 
modification is explicitly allowed.

It can sometimes be more correct to distinguish between GPL-style 
licenses and other more permissive licenses, but in common usage the 
more frequent distinguishing phrase is "copy-left" for GPL-style terms, 
those with strong downstream inheritance.

The bigger distinction is between proprietary licenses on the one hand 
and the full range of free/open licenses on the other.  So while the 
distinction between "free" and "open" licenses can be useful in specific 
contexts, I see no mistake in using "open source" as a more generic 
superset of free/open licenses.  Indeed, I see it used that way every 
day by a wide range of authoritative writers (no doubt to the annoyance 
of Mr. Stallman, but hey, colloquialism happens).

--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web

 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

Thanks for your piper mail link. I found your article very informative (and a
breeze to read!).

I'll retain that what's actually written in the GPL license.. is like toilet
paper
What counts is the creators position... Fine. 

And that'll close the subject of the status of the stack files for me too.
//

== Remains to be cleared the position vis a vis content (audio, video, text,
images) what is the position of the creators? Can it be clarified? Did they
mean that all content be, in their interpretation, included in the GPL? Is
that written up somewhere in a specific proviso or just "thought" ?

== And lastly, the kafkaesque position vis a vis the use of both tools for
the same code. In  practice, can I code part of an application in the
community and part of it in the closed IDE. If not, please do precise if
there are markers somewhere that are used to track the IDE used.

Many thanks, I hope we can close this (long!) thread soon with practical
answers to these questions.
Robert



--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Open-source-closed-source-and-the-value-of-code-tp4701649p4701803.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: LC8DP15 feedback-IDE Issues


On 3/1/2016 5:23 PM, Peter Haworth wrote:

Don't use the Project Browser so can't comment on the second issue


It's confusing, Ali had to explain it to me. I still mostly use the App 
Browser because I need the column layout.


In the Project Browser, the dotted selections are the objects selected 
on the card. You can't alter dotted-line selections from within the PB, 
you need to open the property inspector for that.


The hilited lines are selections you've made directly in the PB. The 
icons at the bottom act on those only. So you can click the icons at the 
bottom to manage the PB-selections (the hilited lines) to resize or 
align. The card-selected objects (dotted lines) won't change. If you 
want the card selections to be acted on, you need to manually re-select 
them in the PB so their lines are hilited as well as dotted.


The idea was to be able to select things in the PB that may not be in 
view, even on totally different cards or stacks, and be able to work 
with them without going there. Hilited lines indicate which objects will 
be affected. This could be useful. On the other hand, there is now a 
disconnect between visible selections on a card and objects you can act 
on within the PB.


Selections also act slightly differently in the Property Inspector. It 
used to be you could shift-click several objects and then double-click 
any one of them to open the multi-object inspector. That doesn't work 
now. Instead you double-click one object on the card to open its 
inspector and then shift-click objects to add more. That causes the 
alignment icon to appear at the top left of the inspector, and the other 
icons will operate on all the selected objects.


--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

Robert Mann wrote:

> 1) my personal conclusion reading these is that the assumption you
> make about stack files falling under GPL is.. questionable, but..
> arguable, particularly if there are elements of interfaces buttons
> so on that would link to the engine. And the more intricated these
> become e.g. with widgets, the more linked this will be.
>
> But, if the stack file contains only code, I doubt that can fall
> onto GPL. The language itself is not copyrightable so a piece of
> code really is an "output" of an editor program and as such is not
> covered by GPL so long I can read!
>
> Arguably, code dispersed in interface objects "sections" can also be
> regarded as a kind of organization of code and thus treated as output
> of the editor's program and thus not covered by the GPL.

A license is a way to express the wishes of a creator of an original 
work over how the work may be used and/or distributed.

The GPL is one embodiment people can choose to express a desire to share 
their work under the condition that works derived from it are shared 
similarly.

The intent is pretty straightforward, and can become complex only when 
one invests time seeking ways to comply only with the letter of the 
license while obviating the intentions of the creator of the work.

While possibly survivable in court depending on the specific 
circumstances, where the GPL has been tested in court it has prevailed, 
and where it hasn't such pursuits are at best generally considered uncool.

When pondering edge cases not yet tested in court, my own personal 
decision is to err on the side of honoring the creator's intentions.

I wrote a note here a couple years ago about such an edge case with 
regard to the Joomla project, and if these sorts of things are of 
interest you may find the links included there useful, esp. the one for 
the Drupal project with regard to their interpretation of derivative works:

> 2) are you saying do I rightly understand? that in order to be
> published by apple a program has to be written FROM scratch up
> in a commercial version???
> So that one cannot start up to write code in OS version and later
> switch to commercial  Are there any.. markers in the code?

"Commercial" is not relevant here; the GPL expresses no opinion about 
cost.  The distinction is "proprietary", which may be non-commercial 
just as GPL-governed works may be sold.

As Mark Waddingham explained earlier, the issue with Apple's app store 
is that it limits the number of downloads of an app by an account, and 
in the view of the authors of the GPL this conflicts with the GPL's 
freedom granted to the user.

The code needs to be licenses in ways that do not include GPL-governed 
elements.  Whether sold or not sold as part of a commercial venture is 
not a part of this.

A license is a way to express the wishes of a creator of an original 
work over how the work may be used and/or distributed.

If you wish to apply a license to your media separate from your stack 
files, LiveCode provides many ways to do that and doing so may clarify 
the relationship between them.

The owners of the copyright here has expressed their intentions with the 
GPL unambiguously with regard to stacks.

What others choose to do is up to them. And no matter that I tend to 
interpret software licenses conservatively in accordance with 
commonly-acceepted conventions, I'm not an attorney and nothing I've 
written can be construed as legal advice.

For me life is much simpler:  when I want to share with downstream 
provisions for sharing I choose GPL, if not I choose something else.

This lets me spend more time on code.

--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web

 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

But.. but.. ??? 

<< With respect to your Question 2, the Indy license doesn't have to 
specifically forbid a service where someone with a freer license compiles 
code on your behalf. You can't build an actual Livecode application without 
using the IDE, so if you used the Community IDE your application must 
adhere to the GPL. The whole point of the GPL is to prevent "free" software 
from being changed into "proprietary" software. >>

This seems kind of absurd.; and yes totally.. unrealistic!!

So far : I have both a commercial and a a Community Edition (yes no more
open source!),
and I can write on one and then open and keep writing on the other.
I mean, there is no way to identify the tool used!!!

Besides, dual licensing of the same work is fine. That one leaves me.. dead
in kafka"s chaos!!




--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Open-source-closed-source-and-the-value-of-code-tp4701649p4701800.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: LC8DP15 feedback-IDE Issues

2016-03-01 Thread William Prothero

Tnx Peter: It’s indeed a feature! Thanks. 

Best,
Bill

> On Mar 1, 2016, at 2:39 PM, Peter TB Brett  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 01/03/2016 22:28, William Prothero wrote:
> 
>> The first thing I’ve noticed is that selecting objects in the Project
>> Browser and stack window is poor. In 7.1 versions and older, when I
>> clicked on an object on the stack window, it would hilite the
>> corresponding entry on the project browser. First off, I find that
>> clicking on different objects in the stack screen, it often refuses
>> to “select” a new object until I click around. Secondly, when I click
>> on an object on the stack window, it should hilite in the project
>> browser. This is very convenient when developing, and it doesn’t seem
>> to happen in LC8.
> 
> Hi Bill,
> 
> Selected objects are now shown in the Project Browser with a highlighted 
> border.  You can "zoom to" an object by right-clicking on it (on the stack) 
> and selecting "Show in Project Browser".  This was an intentional change to 
> make it slightly easier to not "lose your place" in the Project Browser view 
> when you change the selected object in a stack with lots of controls.
> 
> I think I remember seeing a bug relating to selecting things, but I can't 
> find it right now... please go ahead and file a bug report if you can 
> reliably reproduce the problem.
> 
>> So, I’m still on LC8, but the IDE, nice and shiny new as it is, still
>> needs some work. Or, perhaps I just haven’t figured out all of its
>> new options yet.
> 
> Feedback is always appreciated.  Currently I'm finding that the LiveCode 8 
> IDE is actually a big improvement over the LiveCode 7 one for the things that 
> I use it for (but I'm aware that I'm a *very* atypical user!)
> 
> Peter
> 
> -- 
> Dr Peter Brett 
> LiveCode Open Source Team
> 
> LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

I don't think that's true. The Wordpress plugin author doesn't use Wordpress to 
actually type out the code yet it is still covered by the GPL.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 2 Mar 2016, at 10:26 AM, Matt Maier  wrote:
> 
> So, I supposed in theory (disclaimer: IANAL)
> if you wrote absolutely everything in plain script, and never included the
> engine, you would still be able to apply your own license terms.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

Robert did you read the quote I sent yesterday from the horses mouth? I very 
much doubt it would be profitable for anyone to take a different position than 
LiveCode Ltd on whether a stackFile is considered a plugin and therefore 
covered by the GPL. I have to say that I myself was unsure of this point and 
the quote from Mark was in response to my questioning. If you choose take a 
different position than the company my only advice would be to take legal 
council on the matter before you go ahead and test the waters.

Cheers

Monte

Sent from my iPhone

> On 2 Mar 2016, at 9:47 AM, Robert Mann  wrote:
> 
> But, if the stack file contains only code, I doubt that can fall onto GPL.
> The language itself is not copyrightable so a piece of code really is an
> "output" of an editor program and as such is not covered by GPL so long I
> can read!
> 
> Arguably, code dispersed in interface objects "sections" can also be
> regarded as a kind of organization of code and thus treated as output of the
> editor's program and thus not covered by the GPL.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

Thanks Richard.. that one a good example of.. "leonine" clause as we say in
France... 
as we say :: El diabolo hides in small details. 

Coming back to Livecode OS I'm really surprised that nobody seem to have
considered stacks as being not only programs but multimedia interactive
media, and the related legal stuff like copyright of these sources.

That is the basic in any book publishing   see :
https://authorservices.wiley.com/permissions%20guidelines%20for%20authors%20pdf.pdf
https://copyright.lib.utexas.edu/ccmcguid.html

And the GPL inclusion of these elements cannot be governed by the GPL
license which only covers CODE.

Again if live code see it or interpret it differently please do say so.
Thanks.




--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Open-source-closed-source-and-the-value-of-code-tp4701649p4701796.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Export & LC8 & Browser widget


Ali Lloyd wrote:

> I find I get the best results from export snapshot by using the
> following form:
>
> export snapshot from rect (the rect of tObjectLongID) of 
tObjectLongID ...

>
> So you might try
>
> export snapshot from rect (the rect of widget "Chart") of widget 
"Chart" of

> this card to tVar as PNG
>
> If that doesn't give you the correct image then there's definitely
> a bug somewhere.

Ever since the option was added to take a screen shot directly from an 
object's rendered buffer I've been using that, since I get high-quality 
results and can also work with objects not currently on screen.


Does this not work with widgets?:

  export snapshot from widget "Chart" to tVar as PNG


--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
 
 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

2016-03-01 Thread Matt Maier

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Robert Mann  wrote:

> indeed.. I do have an android phone!!
>
> And I read the GNU license for good,
> and the FAQ's for good,
> and some discussions
>
> 1) my personal conclusion reading these is that the assumption you make
> about stack files falling under GPL is.. questionable, but.. arguable,
> particularly if there are elements of interfaces buttons so on that would
> link to the engine. And the more intricated these become e.g. with widgets,
> the more linked this will be.
>
> But, if the stack file contains only code, I doubt that can fall onto GPL.
> The language itself is not copyrightable so a piece of code really is an
> "output" of an editor program and as such is not covered by GPL so long I
> can read!
>

If you sit down at a text editor and write a string of characters that the
Livecode engine happens to understand then you can put whatever copyright
license terms you want on it. So, I supposed in theory (disclaimer: IANAL)
if you wrote absolutely everything in plain script, and never included the
engine, you would still be able to apply your own license terms. But that
script can't be interpreted by anything other than the Livecode engine, so
you wouldn't be able to use it for anything. The value is in the engine,
which someone else wrote and allowed you to use as long as you follow their
rules. Since the rules they chose are the GPL, it's safe to assume there
isn't a legally sound way around it. The best you could hope for is a murky
grey area.


>
> Arguably, code dispersed in interface objects "sections" can also be
> regarded as a kind of organization of code and thus treated as output of
> the
> editor's program and thus not covered by the GPL.
>
> 2) are you saying do I rightly understand? that in order to be published by
> apple a program has to be written FROM scratch up in a commercial
> version???
> So that one cannot start up to write code in OS version and later switch to
> commercial  Are there any.. markers in the code?
>
>
The number of question marks indicates that you're working your way through
the mourning process.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%BCbler-Ross_model#Stages
There are whole cadres of lawyers who live in fear of the day they walk
into work and their boss calls them into a meeting because a random coder
accidentally included a piece of GPL software somewhere in the company's
proprietary product. GPL is not practical, it is idealistic. The authors
consider it a social movement. So it's not so much Apple's policy, it's
that the GPL is incompatible with anything vaguely proprietary, and of
course Apple is crazy proprietary.


> In practice I really wonder if Apple would trace back the origin of the
> origin of a code and make sure it was not "written" with GPL covered
> program. if it did, I wonder what they say about all those lines written in
> EMACS.
>
> To me that argument is kind of "tiré par le cheveux" as we say in french.
> (something like.. stretched out?).
>
> I love my android phone...
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Open-source-closed-source-and-the-value-of-code-tp4701649p4701790.html
> Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: LC8DP15 feedback-IDE Issues

2016-03-01 Thread Peter Haworth

I've also noticed the first issue you mentioned.  In my case, it's not so
much that clicking an object doesn't select but trying to grab the handles
to resize an object has to be very accurate or the object is deselected.  I
guess I should enter a QCC report.

Don't use the Project Browser so can't comment on the second issue

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 2:40 PM Peter TB Brett 
wrote:

>
>
> On 01/03/2016 22:28, William Prothero wrote:
>
> > The first thing I’ve noticed is that selecting objects in the Project
> > Browser and stack window is poor. In 7.1 versions and older, when I
> > clicked on an object on the stack window, it would hilite the
> > corresponding entry on the project browser. First off, I find that
> > clicking on different objects in the stack screen, it often refuses
> > to “select” a new object until I click around. Secondly, when I click
> > on an object on the stack window, it should hilite in the project
> > browser. This is very convenient when developing, and it doesn’t seem
> > to happen in LC8.
>
> Hi Bill,
>
> Selected objects are now shown in the Project Browser with a highlighted
> border.  You can "zoom to" an object by right-clicking on it (on the
> stack) and selecting "Show in Project Browser".  This was an intentional
> change to make it slightly easier to not "lose your place" in the
> Project Browser view when you change the selected object in a stack with
> lots of controls.
>
> I think I remember seeing a bug relating to selecting things, but I
> can't find it right now... please go ahead and file a bug report if you
> can reliably reproduce the problem.
>
> > So, I’m still on LC8, but the IDE, nice and shiny new as it is, still
> > needs some work. Or, perhaps I just haven’t figured out all of its
> > new options yet.
>
> Feedback is always appreciated.  Currently I'm finding that the LiveCode
> 8 IDE is actually a big improvement over the LiveCode 7 one for the
> things that I use it for (but I'm aware that I'm a *very* atypical user!)
>
>   Peter
>
> --
> Dr Peter Brett 
> LiveCode Open Source Team
>
> LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/
>
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: beggars be choosers

2016-03-01 Thread Bob Sneidar

You'd just eat whatever was in it and then complain you still didn't have a tin.

Bob S


On Mar 1, 2016, at 09:57 , RM 
> wrote:

In our current development process, "Release Candidate" builds are exactly
what they say on the tin, i.e. once we release 8.0 RC 1, then 8.0 final
release will follow shortly after.

I'd like to register a formal complaint: when I downloaded the last release 
candidate I didn't get a tin.

Richmond.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

indeed.. I do have an android phone!!

And I read the GNU license for good,
and the FAQ's for good,
and some discussions

1) my personal conclusion reading these is that the assumption you make
about stack files falling under GPL is.. questionable, but.. arguable,
particularly if there are elements of interfaces buttons so on that would
link to the engine. And the more intricated these become e.g. with widgets,
the more linked this will be.

But, if the stack file contains only code, I doubt that can fall onto GPL.
The language itself is not copyrightable so a piece of code really is an
"output" of an editor program and as such is not covered by GPL so long I
can read!

Arguably, code dispersed in interface objects "sections" can also be
regarded as a kind of organization of code and thus treated as output of the
editor's program and thus not covered by the GPL.

2) are you saying do I rightly understand? that in order to be published by
apple a program has to be written FROM scratch up in a commercial version???
So that one cannot start up to write code in OS version and later switch to
commercial Are there any.. markers in the code?

In practice I really wonder if Apple would trace back the origin of the
origin of a code and make sure it was not "written" with GPL covered
program. if it did, I wonder what they say about all those lines written in
EMACS.

To me that argument is kind of "tiré par le cheveux" as we say in french.
(something like.. stretched out?).

I love my android phone...

--
View this message in context:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Open-source-closed-source-and-the-value-of-code-tp4701649p4701790.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

2016-03-01 Thread Matt Maier

Robert, as you conduct your research you should also learn about the
difference between Free Software and Open Source Software. In brief, Free
Software does special things for moral reasons; it is "right" that software
be liberated. Open Source Software does special things for pragmatic
reasons; it is "useful" that software be easy to use without asking
permission.

In both cases, you leverage copyright law. You cannot get away from
"restrictions" and still do Free or Open Source Software. The licenses are
used to restrict licensees from closing off the source of the software (to
a greater or lesser extent).

The GNU General Public License (GPL) is not an Open Source license, it is a
Free license. For reference, here is the Free Software Foundation's stance
on Open Source
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html
"...a license designed specifically to protect freedom for all users of a
program."

The GNU has a lot of restrictions because it's specifically designed to
prevent anyone who uses Free software from acting in a way contradictory to
the ideals of the Free software movement. If you want the software, then
you have to follow the terms of the license. If you don't follow all of the
terms, you lose your license and open yourself to litigation. This threat
has teeth because Free software licenses have been upheld in court. The
restrictions are the point.

It doesn't help that Livecode always uses the term "Open Source" when
referring to the Community Edition. This could easily (and does) lead
people to assume the Community Edition has an Open Source license. It
doesn't, so if you're looking for pragmatic terms, rather than idealistic
terms, you're going to be confused.

With respect to your Question 2, the Indy license doesn't have to
specifically forbid a service where someone with a freer license compiles
code on your behalf. You can't build an actual Livecode application without
using the IDE, so if you used the Community IDE your application must
adhere to the GPL. The whole point of the GPL is to prevent "free" software
from being changed into "proprietary" software.

As for Apple, they don't want hobby developers releasing apps into their
system. Apple has zero interest in letting anyone play or experiment in
their closed ecosystem. Android is the Wild West you're looking for.
Or...maybe Windows phone? They might be desperate or ambivalent enough.

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Robert Mann  wrote:

> The price rise in the commercial license has led me to try understand the
> Opens SOurce License, although I had always in my mind to keep with a
> commercial license ideally.
>
> And that leads to big surprises. I'll be doing a little bit of homework on
> that.
>
> *Question 1 :: is there somewhere a kind of WIKI place for live code whereI
> could start up open a license subject/page to be amended in a more
> structured and constructive way than that list???*
>
> Question 2 :: In that spirit, Peter TB Brett, it would be a contribution if
> could you throw in the source/ref of the terms & conditions of the indy
> license that forbids to provide the service described by J L. just above
> consisting in accompanying an author in the realm of iOs app publishing.
>
> Behing the great idea of a Open SOurce, it is surpassing to find so much
> barriers being built around it.
> And that does not seem totally realistic and respectful either.
>
> I find it hard and really surprising that such a service is not provided by
> somebody because I would find it really useful. Thinking about it, I
> actually have one project I worked upon that would greatly benefit from
> such
> a service as I just do not have time to dig and try out myself the iOs
> publishing. Frankly it just is not a thing you just do once as a hobbits to
> my view.
>
> On the indy side, i find it very intriguing that you can invest into a tool
> and be so tightly regulated as to what you can or not do.
>
> So far to go into the iOs model, you need :
> -- to do it yourself (if calling help from an indy is banned!)
> -- invest in the tool 1000 bucks, plus..
> -- invest time in trying out things with a stange spread out documentation
> here and there.
> -- deal with mister apple and the niceties & subtleties one regularly see
> in
> the forum..
>
> Mumm.. sounds great!!
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Open-source-closed-source-and-the-value-of-code-tp4701649p4701775.html
> Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and

Re: Export & LC8 & Browser widget

2016-03-01 Thread Ali Lloyd

I find I get the best results from export snapshot by using the following
form:

export snapshot from rect (the rect of tObjectLongID) of tObjectLongID ...

So you might try

export snapshot from rect (the rect of widget "Chart") of widget "Chart" of
this card to tVar as PNG

If that doesn't give you the correct image then there's definitely a bug
somewhere.

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 10:39 PM Richard Gaskin 
wrote:

> Terence Heaford wrote:
>
> >> On 1 Mar 2016, at 21:57, Terence Heaford 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> put the rect widget "Chart" into tRect
> >>
> >> subtract 22 from item 2 of tRect
> >>
> >> subtract 22 from item 4 of tRect
> >
> > As a Mac only person I really find it weird to keep having to make
> adjustments for the height of a menu.
>
> I dream of a day when I can enjoy that minor weirdness to support
> Ubuntu's global menu bar:
>
> http://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=10026
>
> --
>   Richard Gaskin
>   Fourth World Systems
>   Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
>   
>   ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com
>
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Players in HTML5 - ETA for Full Functionality?

2016-03-01 Thread Terry Judd

On 2/03/2016 9:28 am, "use-livecode on behalf of Peter TB Brett"
 wrote:

>
>
>On 01/03/2016 22:17, Peter TB Brett wrote:
>> On 25/02/2016 06:28, Terry Judd wrote:
>>> Apologies for hijacking this thread somewhat but Peter could you
>>>possibly
>>> comment on the likelihood of clipboard support being added to HTML5 in
>>> the
>>> near (or middle) future. I understand there are potential security
>>> concerns around use of the clipboard but it would be good to hear your
>>> thoughts on how these might be accommodated (or not).
>>
>> It basically depends on two things:
>>
>> 1) A suitable JavaScript API being available in browsers
>> (http://caniuse.com/#feat=clipboard).  Since I first started looking at
>> HTML5 support, this aspect has actually come on leaps and bounds.  Using
>> the appropriate HTML5 JavaScript API, correctly, should
>
>Note in particular, from the website I've linked above, that many
>browsers won't provide "paste" at all, or won't provide it without a
>focussed, editable HTML form text field.  These are a the security
>considerations I mentioned previously.

Thanks for the explanation Peter - in my case I¹m looking to paste a
simple report (plain text) into an editable text field on another page, so
possible at least.

Regards,

Terry...


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

Robert Mann wrote:

> Behing the great idea of a Open SOurce, it is surpassing to find
> so much barriers being built around it.

As Peter explained, for most use cases it's not all that deep.

But for edge cases all licenses can be complex, open source and 
proprietary alike.

The only reason some folks think proprietary licenses are simple is 
because they don't read them. :)

Consider the EULA for Apple's proprietary Final Cut Pro:

The features and even the name imply that it might be an excellent 
choice for a wide range of uses that can include professional work.  And 
indeed I know may pros who've used it; I'm sure many others here do too.

But did they write a fairly hefty check to the MPEGLA patent consortium 
to be legally able to do so?

The Final Cut Pro EULA includes:

   12. MPEG-2 Notice. To the extent that the Apple Software contains
   MPEG-2 functionality, the following provision applies: ANY USE OF
   THIS PRODUCT OTHER THAN CONSUMER PERSONAL USE IN ANY MANNER THAT
   COMPLIES WITH THE MPEG-2 STANDARD FOR ENCODING VIDEO INFORMATION
   FOR PACKAGED MEDIA IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT A LICENSE UNDER
   APPLICABLE PATENTS IN THE MPEG-2 PATENT PORTFOLIO, WHICH LICENSE
   IS AVAILABLE FROM MPEG LA, L.L.C., 250 STEELE STREET, SUITE 300,
   DENVER, COLORADO 80206.

   13. MPEG-4 Notice. This product is licensed under the MPEG-4 Systems
   Patent Portfolio License for encoding in compliance with the MPEG-4
   Systems Standard, except that an additional license and payment of
   royalties are necessary for encoding in connection with (i) data
   stored or replicated in physical media which is paid for on a title
   by title basis and/or (ii) data which is paid for on a title by
   title basis and is transmitted to an end user for permanent storage
   and/or use. Such additional license may be obtained from MPEG LA,
   LLC. See http://www.mpegla.com for additional details.

   Additional use licenses and fees are required for use of information
   encoded in compliance with the MPEG-4 Visual Standard other than the
   personal and non-commercial use of a consumer (i) in connection with
   information which has been encoded in compliance with the MPEG-4
   Visual Standard by a consumer engaged in a personal and
   non-commercial activity, and/or (ii) in connection with MPEG-4
   encoded video under license from a video provider. Additional
   information including that relating to promotional,internal and
   commercial uses and licensing may be obtained from MPEG LA, LLC.
   See http://www.mpegla.com.

Any license can be complex, and all are worth reading.

At least most open source licenses are standardized, so you only need to 
read one or two to understand the terms for thousands of software 
packages.

But every proprietary license can be unique, requiring us to go through 
them all with each version of each package to see what details may lie 
within.

--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web

 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: LC8DP15 feedback-IDE Issues




On 01/03/2016 22:28, William Prothero wrote:


The first thing I’ve noticed is that selecting objects in the Project
Browser and stack window is poor. In 7.1 versions and older, when I
clicked on an object on the stack window, it would hilite the
corresponding entry on the project browser. First off, I find that
clicking on different objects in the stack screen, it often refuses
to “select” a new object until I click around. Secondly, when I click
on an object on the stack window, it should hilite in the project
browser. This is very convenient when developing, and it doesn’t seem
to happen in LC8.


Hi Bill,

Selected objects are now shown in the Project Browser with a highlighted 
border.  You can "zoom to" an object by right-clicking on it (on the 
stack) and selecting "Show in Project Browser".  This was an intentional 
change to make it slightly easier to not "lose your place" in the 
Project Browser view when you change the selected object in a stack with 
lots of controls.


I think I remember seeing a bug relating to selecting things, but I 
can't find it right now... please go ahead and file a bug report if you 
can reliably reproduce the problem.



So, I’m still on LC8, but the IDE, nice and shiny new as it is, still
needs some work. Or, perhaps I just haven’t figured out all of its
new options yet.


Feedback is always appreciated.  Currently I'm finding that the LiveCode 
8 IDE is actually a big improvement over the LiveCode 7 one for the 
things that I use it for (but I'm aware that I'm a *very* atypical user!)


 Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Open Source Team

LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Export & LC8 & Browser widget


Terence Heaford wrote:


On 1 Mar 2016, at 21:57, Terence Heaford  wrote:

put the rect widget "Chart" into tRect

subtract 22 from item 2 of tRect

subtract 22 from item 4 of tRect


As a Mac only person I really find it weird to keep having to make adjustments 
for the height of a menu.


I dream of a day when I can enjoy that minor weirdness to support 
Ubuntu's global menu bar:


http://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=10026

--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
 
 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Export & LC8 & Browser widget

Oh! I understand now. That might be a bug, depending on how you look at 
it. Card coordinates don't change when there's a menu scrolled out of 
view; you'd think that snapshots wouldn't either.


On 3/1/2016 4:24 PM, Tore Nilsen wrote:

I think Terence has a menuBar of his own making in the stack, that would count 
for the extra 22 pixels on the card being pushed upward on the mac version, but 
still a part of the card height.

Tore



1. mar. 2016 kl. 23.22 skrev J. Landman Gay :

On 3/1/2016 3:57 PM, Terence Heaford wrote:



On 1 Mar 2016, at 21:32, J. Landman Gay 
wrote:

"To export a snapshot for a portion of a stack you use the form:
export snapshot from rect[angle] of window windowID to ... Where
windowId is the windowId property of the required stack."


This does not work correctly on a Mac for the reason given
previously.

The top and bottom of the image exported has shifted down by the
depth of the menubar. put the rect widget "Chart" into tRect

export snapshot from rectangle tRect of window (the windowId of
window "Test") to tVar as PNG


It works here on a Mac. I happened to have a tree view widget at hand, but any 
of them should work.

put the windowid of this stack into twid
export snapshot from rect (the rect of widget "tree view") \
   of window twid to file "imgTest.png" as PNG

No adjustments needed.



--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

J. Landman Gay wrote:

> If memory serves, the LC team has (had?) a service that would build
> for iOS for you as well as help with all the back-end Apple
> certification, etc. Is that still around?

I don't believe so.  As I wrote in this thread two days ago:

 > What I questionned is that we're going to be missing an intermediate
 > tool/license that would allow somebody to close SOME of his work at a
 > reasonable cost for a hobbyist. Just as was originally designed in
 > Hypercard.

Originally HyperCard was given away for free with every Mac.

Indeed, once it became a product under Claris it proved difficult for it
to sustain itself economically.

FWIW, LC has experimented with a wide range of price points over the
years, including many that match price points suggested in recent
related threads here.  If they had produced the sort of results hoped
for we wouldn't be having this conversation today.

--
 Richard Gaskin
 Fourth World Systems
 Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web

 ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Players in HTML5 - ETA for Full Functionality?




On 01/03/2016 22:17, Peter TB Brett wrote:

On 25/02/2016 06:28, Terry Judd wrote:

Apologies for hijacking this thread somewhat but Peter could you possibly
comment on the likelihood of clipboard support being added to HTML5 in
the
near (or middle) future. I understand there are potential security
concerns around use of the clipboard but it would be good to hear your
thoughts on how these might be accommodated (or not).


It basically depends on two things:

1) A suitable JavaScript API being available in browsers
(http://caniuse.com/#feat=clipboard).  Since I first started looking at
HTML5 support, this aspect has actually come on leaps and bounds.  Using
the appropriate HTML5 JavaScript API, correctly, should


Note in particular, from the website I've linked above, that many 
browsers won't provide "paste" at all, or won't provide it without a 
focussed, editable HTML form text field.  These are a the security 
considerations I mentioned previously.


  Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Open Source Team

LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

LC8DP15 feedback-IDE Issues

2016-03-01 Thread William Prothero

Folks:
I’ve “bit the bullet” and started to work on my app with LC8-DP15. I’m on OSX 
El-Capitan. 

The first thing I’ve noticed is that selecting objects in the Project Browser 
and stack window is poor. In 7.1 versions and older, when I clicked on an 
object on the stack window, it would hilite the corresponding entry on the 
project browser. First off, I find that clicking on different objects in the 
stack screen, it often refuses to “select” a new object until I click around. 
Secondly, when I click on an object on the stack window, it should hilite in 
the project browser. This is very convenient when developing, and it doesn’t 
seem to happen in LC8.

So, I’m still on LC8, but the IDE, nice and shiny new as it is, still needs 
some work. Or, perhaps I just haven’t figured out all of its new options yet.

Best,
Bill



William Prothero, Ph.D.
University of California, Santa Barbara, Emeritus
proth...@earthednet.org




___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Export & LC8 & Browser widget


On 3/1/2016 3:57 PM, Terence Heaford wrote:

put the rect widget "Chart" into tRect


That may be the problem.

put the rect *OF* widget "chart"...

--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

Hi Robert,

The situation is quite simple:

1) The Open Source edition of LiveCode is licensed under the GNU General
Public License, version 3. This says that if you distribute works
derived from the Open Source edition of LiveCode (which we interpret to
include stack files), then you must do so under the same license.

2) The Apple App Store terms and conditions are incompatible with the
GPL v3. So you can't distribute apps created with the Open Source
edition of LiveCode via the Apple App Store without violating the
copyright of LiveCode.

Whether your program gets from the Open Source edition of LiveCode to
the App Store by one or more intermediate people is immaterial.

LiveCode Ltd. have not built any barriers around the Open Source
edition; the only one that matters was constructed by Apple.

I recommend acquiring an Android phone.

Peter

On 01/03/2016 21:50, Robert Mann wrote:

The price rise in the commercial license has led me to try understand the
Opens SOurce License, although I had always in my mind to keep with a
commercial license ideally.

And that leads to big surprises. I'll be doing a little bit of homework on
that.

*Question 1 :: is there somewhere a kind of WIKI place for live code whereI
could start up open a license subject/page to be amended in a more
structured and constructive way than that list???*

Question 2 :: In that spirit, Peter TB Brett, it would be a contribution if
could you throw in the source/ref of the terms & conditions of the indy
license that forbids to provide the service described by J L. just above
consisting in accompanying an author in the realm of iOs app publishing.

Behing the great idea of a Open SOurce, it is surpassing to find so much
barriers being built around it.
And that does not seem totally realistic and respectful either.

I find it hard and really surprising that such a service is not provided by
somebody because I would find it really useful. Thinking about it, I
actually have one project I worked upon that would greatly benefit from such
a service as I just do not have time to dig and try out myself the iOs
publishing. Frankly it just is not a thing you just do once as a hobbits to
my view.

On the indy side, i find it very intriguing that you can invest into a tool
and be so tightly regulated as to what you can or not do.

So far to go into the iOs model, you need :
-- to do it yourself (if calling help from an indy is banned!)
-- invest in the tool 1000 bucks, plus..
-- invest time in trying out things with a stange spread out documentation
here and there.
-- deal with mister apple and the niceties & subtleties one regularly see in
the forum..

Mumm.. sounds great!!

--
View this message in context:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Open-source-closed-source-and-the-value-of-code-tp4701649p4701775.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

--
Dr Peter Brett
LiveCode Open Source Team

LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/

Re: Export & LC8 & Browser widget

2016-03-01 Thread Tore Nilsen

I think Terence has a menuBar of his own making in the stack, that would count 
for the extra 22 pixels on the card being pushed upward on the mac version, but 
still a part of the card height.

Tore


> 1. mar. 2016 kl. 23.22 skrev J. Landman Gay :
> 
> On 3/1/2016 3:57 PM, Terence Heaford wrote:
>> 
>>> On 1 Mar 2016, at 21:32, J. Landman Gay 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> "To export a snapshot for a portion of a stack you use the form:
>>> export snapshot from rect[angle] of window windowID to ... Where
>>> windowId is the windowId property of the required stack."
>> 
>> This does not work correctly on a Mac for the reason given
>> previously.
>> 
>> The top and bottom of the image exported has shifted down by the
>> depth of the menubar. put the rect widget "Chart" into tRect
>> 
>> export snapshot from rectangle tRect of window (the windowId of
>> window "Test") to tVar as PNG
> 
> It works here on a Mac. I happened to have a tree view widget at hand, but 
> any of them should work.
> 
> put the windowid of this stack into twid
> export snapshot from rect (the rect of widget "tree view") \
>   of window twid to file "imgTest.png" as PNG
> 
> No adjustments needed.
> -- 
> Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com 
> 
> HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com 
> 
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com 
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode 
> 
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Export & LC8 & Browser widget


On 3/1/2016 3:57 PM, Terence Heaford wrote:



On 1 Mar 2016, at 21:32, J. Landman Gay 
wrote:

"To export a snapshot for a portion of a stack you use the form:
export snapshot from rect[angle] of window windowID to ... Where
windowId is the windowId property of the required stack."


This does not work correctly on a Mac for the reason given
previously.

The top and bottom of the image exported has shifted down by the
depth of the menubar. put the rect widget "Chart" into tRect

export snapshot from rectangle tRect of window (the windowId of
window "Test") to tVar as PNG


It works here on a Mac. I happened to have a tree view widget at hand, 
but any of them should work.


put the windowid of this stack into twid
export snapshot from rect (the rect of widget "tree view") \
   of window twid to file "imgTest.png" as PNG

No adjustments needed.
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Players in HTML5 - ETA for Full Functionality?


On 25/02/2016 06:28, Terry Judd wrote:

Apologies for hijacking this thread somewhat but Peter could you possibly
comment on the likelihood of clipboard support being added to HTML5 in the
near (or middle) future. I understand there are potential security
concerns around use of the clipboard but it would be good to hear your
thoughts on how these might be accommodated (or not).


It basically depends on two things:

1) A suitable JavaScript API being available in browsers 
(http://caniuse.com/#feat=clipboard).  Since I first started looking at 
HTML5 support, this aspect has actually come on leaps and bounds.  Using 
the appropriate HTML5 JavaScript API, correctly, should


2) Someone who's comfortable simultaneously working in 3-4 different 
programming languages having time to hook it up to the LiveCode engine.


  Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Open Source Team

LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

The price rise in the commercial license has led me to try understand the
Opens SOurce License, although I had always in my mind to keep with a
commercial license ideally.

And that leads to big surprises. I'll be doing a little bit of homework on
that.

*Question 1 :: is there somewhere a kind of WIKI place for live code whereI
could start up open a license subject/page to be amended in a more
structured and constructive way than that list???*

Behing the great idea of a Open SOurce, it is surpassing to find so much
barriers being built around it.
And that does not seem totally realistic and respectful either.

On the indy side, i find it very intriguing that you can invest into a tool
and be so tightly regulated as to what you can or not do.

Mumm.. sounds great!!

Re: Players in HTML5 - ETA for Full Functionality?


On 25/02/2016 19:23, Matt Maier wrote:

That was too abstract and hypothetical for me to be sure I followed
correctly.

In the approach the Livecode team is taking now, is it accurate to say that
the html5 standalone bundles up the livecode engine with any app-specific
objects/scripts and pushes the whole thing into the client browser, such
that all of the (supportable) functionality runs client-side?


Just to clarify: yes, that's exactly correct.

  Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Open Source Team

LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Export & LC8 & Browser widget


> On 1 Mar 2016, at 21:57, Terence Heaford  wrote:
> 
> put the rect widget "Chart" into tRect
> 
> subtract 22 from item 2 of tRect
> 
> subtract 22 from item 4 of tRect


As a Mac only person I really find it weird to keep having to make adjustments 
for the height of a menu.

All the best

Terry
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: LC8 Browser widget


> On 1 Mar 2016, at 21:31, Peter TB Brett  wrote:
> 
> On 01/03/2016 21:15, Terence Heaford wrote:
>> Is it the intention to add printing functionality to this widget?
> 
> Yes, but the core dev team probably won't have time to work on it before the 
> LiveCode 8.0 release.
> 
>   Peter
> 
> -- 
> Dr Peter Brett 
> LiveCode Open Source Team
> 
> LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode



Thanks for the response


Terry
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Export & LC8 & Browser widget


> On 1 Mar 2016, at 21:32, J. Landman Gay  wrote:
> 
> "To export a snapshot for a portion of a stack you use the form:
> export snapshot from rect[angle] of window windowID to ...
> Where windowId is the windowId property of the required stack."

This does not work correctly on a Mac for the reason given previously.

The top and bottom of the image exported has shifted down by the depth of the 
menubar.
put the rect widget "Chart" into tRect

export snapshot from rectangle tRect of window (the windowId of window "Test") 
to tVar as PNG


The corrected version would be:

put the rect widget "Chart" into tRect

subtract 22 from item 2 of tRect

subtract 22 from item 4 of tRect

export snapshot from rectangle tRect of window (the windowId of window  “Test") 
to tVar as PNG



All the best

Terry
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: LCB: Complex statement help needed in LCB

2016-03-01 Thread Stephen MacLean


> On Mar 1, 2016, at 4:30 PM, Peter TB Brett  wrote:
> 
> 
>> I'll give it a go. While I could just wrap the whole thing up and
>> execute it as a script, I’m really trying to do as much as possible
>> in LCB to learn.
> 
> Yes.  I quite like programming in LCB because the compiler helps catch (some) 
> silly mistakes.  However, there are some things that are difficult (or 
> impossible) using only LCB.  Hopefully, that will be dealt with over time!
> 
> Peter
> 

Hi Peter,

Thanks for all the examples, helps a lot!

The complier helps a bit, here’s to hoping that some sort of “remote” debugger 
for it is coming. While i’m getting better at guessing where my errors are, it 
takes forever to narrow it down and then build out again. Definitely way slower 
than coding in LCS.

But I sense once we have access to the underlying OS foundations, it’s going to 
be the place to be to get what I need:)

Thanks again,

Steve



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Export & LC8 & Browser widget


On 3/1/2016 1:41 PM, Terence Heaford wrote:

I have been unable to get the Browser widget to print as I
suspect there is no option for this so I thought I would try a snapshot using 
this:

export snapshot from rect (the rect of widget "Chart") of this card to tVar as 
PNG

put tVar into image "myImage"


Unfortunately it does not capture the image in the correct rect of the card 
even though the dimensions seem correct.

Am I missing something in the application of the export snapshot command.


The coordinates are global to the screen unless you specify a window ID. 
I.e., 0,0 is the top left corner of the monitor.


You can either translate the coords to global using globalLoc() or 
specify a window ID. From the docs:


"To export a snapshot for a portion of a stack you use the form:
export snapshot from rect[angle] of window windowID to ...
Where windowId is the windowId property of the required stack."

--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: LC8 Browser widget


On 01/03/2016 21:15, Terence Heaford wrote:

Is it the intention to add printing functionality to this widget?


Yes, but the core dev team probably won't have time to work on it before 
the LiveCode 8.0 release.


   Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Open Source Team

LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: LCB: Complex statement help needed in LCB


On 01/03/2016 21:14, Stephen MacLean wrote:


Thanks:) Being strongly typed has it’s plusses and minuses. I was
hoping to avoid “parsed as number” by using the “any” type.

It looks like that when you have a variable in LCB with a type of
“any” and perform an action on it, it becomes that type. So perform
“put the number of chars in tCardNum into tLen” and tCardNum becomes
a string type. Do "put 0 into tCheckSum” and tCheckSum becomes a
number.


It's a bit better to think of pegs (values) and holes (slots).  If you 
write:


   variable tStringVar as String

then you're creating a "String-shaped hole".  It'll only let you put a 
"String-shaped peg" into it, i.e. a value of type String.


If you did:

   put 5 into tStringVar

then you get an error -- you're "putting a square peg into a round 
hole", as it were.


The "any" metatype is a bit special, because it only applies to slots. 
There's no such thing as a value of type "any".  Also, note that you 
can't put the "nothing" value into a slot of type "any".


Going to your examples:

   variable tCardNum as any
   variable tLen as any
   put (the number of chars in (tCardNum)) into tLen

I've added some parentheses to show how evaluation proceeds.  First 
"tCardNum" is evaluated, producing a value $1.  Next, "the number of 
chars in $1" is evaluated.  If the value $1 is a String, then it 
produces a value $2 (which happens to be always a Number).  Otherwise, 
it generates an error.  Finally, "put $2 into tLen" is evaluated.  Since 
$2 is a value of type Number, and tLen is a slot of type "any", they're 
compatible, and the assignment works.  The result is that tLen, a slot 
of type any, contains a value of type Number.


Note that nothing about that statement changes the type of tCardNum (or 
the value it contains).


   variable tCheckSum as any
   put 0 into tCheckSum

First "0" is evaluated, producing $1 (a value of type Number).  Next, 
"put $1 into tCheckSum" is evaluated.  Since $1 is a value of type 
Number, and tCheckSum is a slot of type any, the assignment is 
permitted.  The result is the same: tCheckSum, a slot of type any, 
contains a value of type Number (i.e. tCheckSum is 0).



I'll give it a go. While I could just wrap the whole thing up and
execute it as a script, I’m really trying to do as much as possible
in LCB to learn.


Yes.  I quite like programming in LCB because the compiler helps catch 
(some) silly mistakes.  However, there are some things that are 
difficult (or impossible) using only LCB.  Hopefully, that will be dealt 
with over time!


 Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Open Source Team

LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Set the Opacity of a Button Background

2016-03-01 Thread Scott Rossi

Another option similar to Randy's is to create an image tile -- for
example, a 48x48 white PNG that's 50% opaque -- and assign this as the
backPattern of the button.  Using this method you can scale the button to
any size and the translucency will fill accordingly.  You can also assign
a separate icon if desired.

Unless you REALLY need the properties of a button control, you can also
consider other objects to act as buttons, such as graphics, where you can
employ a translucent gradient fill to the control, or fields, where you
can create the effect of a label that has multiple text styles.  There are
several options for create button-style controls.

Regards,

Scott Rossi
Creative Director
Tactile Media, UX/UI Design

On 3/1/16, 12:20 PM, "use-livecode on behalf of Randy Hengst"

wrote:

>It sounds to me that you want the color of the button to be 50%  meaning
>that the card (or whatever) below it will show though. And, you want the
>border and name of button to be opaque if all that is correct, you might
>want to give this a try.
>
>create an image in the color you want the button background to be 
>perhaps white (you can do that within LC with import snapshot). Then
>assign that image as the icon for the button (you¹ll have to fiddle with
>sizing the image). Set the iconGravity of the button to ³center². Then
>adjust the blendLevel of the image and you¹ll see that reflected in the
>button¹s background.
>
>If you just set the blendLevel of the button, then the name and border
>will also change opacity.
>
>be well,
>randy
>
>Randy Hengst
>www.classroomFocusedSoftware.com
>
>
>> On Mar 1, 2016, at 1:25 PM, Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami
>> wrote:
>> 
>> We looking at very simple button design:
>> 
>> 1)  Border color is on/white/2px
>> 2)  background is set to clear (no color assignment and no icon)
>> 3)  background opacity set to 50% # if we can figure out how
>> 4)  Button name/label white
>> 

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Set the Opacity of a Button Background


On 3/1/2016 1:25 PM, Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami wrote:

We looking at very simple button design:

1)  Border color is on/white/2px
2)  background is set to clear (no color assignment and no icon)
3)  background opacity set to 50% # if we can figure out how
4)  Button name/label white

...

The use case is, again, as discussed in another thread: we want

> visibility of the text on top of *any* image to be visible.


If you set the icon of the button to the image rather than its 
backpattern, you can do it by adjusting the opacity of the referenced image.


--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

LC8 Browser widget

Is it the intention to add printing functionality to this widget?


Thanks

Terry

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: LCB: Complex statement help needed in LCB

2016-03-01 Thread Stephen MacLean

> On Mar 1, 2016, at 3:58 PM, Peter TB Brett  wrote:
> 
> On 01/03/2016 20:44, Stephen MacLean wrote:
>> Hi All,
>> 
>> I’m looking for some help on complex statements in LCB.
>> 
>> I’m trying to take a script statement like this:
>> 
>> if (char x of tCardNum)*2 > 9 then
> 
> Hi Stephen,
> 
> Don't forget that LCB is strongly typed.  That means that a string isn't a 
> number, so you can't multiply it!
> 
> The expression "char x of tCardNum" evaluates to a string that's one 
> character long.  If "tCardNum" has fewer than "x" characters, then it throws 
> an error.
> 
> If the character is expected to be the string representation of a number, 
> then you probably want to explicitly convert it to a number:
> 
>   variable tNum as Number
>   put (char x of tCardNum) parsed as number into tNum
>   if 9 < 2 * tNum then
>  ...
>   end if
> 
>   Peter

Hi Peter,

Thanks:) Being strongly typed has it’s plusses and minuses. I was hoping to 
avoid “parsed as number” by using the “any” type.

It looks like that when you have a variable in LCB with a type of “any” and 
perform an action on it, it becomes that type. So perform “put the number of 
chars in tCardNum into tLen” and tCardNum becomes a string type. Do "put 0 into 
tCheckSum” and tCheckSum becomes a number.

I'll give it a go. While I could just wrap the whole thing up and execute it as 
a script, I’m really trying to do as much as possible in LCB to learn.

Thanks so much!

Best,

Steve MacLean

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code


On 3/1/2016 2:09 PM, Monte Goulding wrote:



On 1 Mar 2016, at 5:05 PM, Alejandro Tejada
 wrote:

Why not publish your Apps for iOS using a Publisher Partner?

Maybe an iOS Publisher Partner selected among our very own LiveCode
fellow developers.


We discussed this during the original Kickstarter and I believe the
discussion led to a clause in the commercial license that we could
not build standalones for people unless we had done work to the value
of at least an Indy license. Something like that anyway…. The idea
being it would be more logical for the Community user to get their
own license rather than work around the GPL by using a build service.
I would hope that if someone is discovered running a build service
they would have their license cancelled promptly.


If memory serves, the LC team has (had?) a service that would build for 
iOS for you as well as help with all the back-end Apple certification, 
etc. Is that still around?


--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Export & LC8 & Browser widget


> On 1 Mar 2016, at 20:33, Tore Nilsen  wrote:
> 
> It may not be the most elegant solution, but this works for me:
> 
> on mouseUp
> 
> put the rect widget "Chart" into tRect
> 
> add left of this stack to item 1 of tRect
> 
> add left of this stack to item 3 of tRect
> 
> add top of this stack to item 2 of tRect
> 
> add top of this stack to item 4 of tRect
> 
> export snapshot from rect tRect to tVar as PNG
> 
> put tVar into image "myImage"
> 
> end mouseUp
> 
> 
> Tore


This didn’t quite work correctly on my iMac there is a grey bar at the bottom 
of the image.

I believe this is do with the height of the menubar?

add left of this stack to item 1 of tRect

add left of this stack to item 3 of tRect

add top of this stack - 22 to item 2 of tRect

add top of this stack - 22 to item 4 of tRect


Thanks

Terry
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: LCB: Complex statement help needed in LCB


On 01/03/2016 20:44, Stephen MacLean wrote:

Hi All,

I’m looking for some help on complex statements in LCB.

I’m trying to take a script statement like this:

if (char x of tCardNum)*2 > 9 then


Hi Stephen,

Don't forget that LCB is strongly typed.  That means that a string isn't 
a number, so you can't multiply it!


The expression "char x of tCardNum" evaluates to a string that's one 
character long.  If "tCardNum" has fewer than "x" characters, then it 
throws an error.


If the character is expected to be the string representation of a 
number, then you probably want to explicitly convert it to a number:


   variable tNum as Number
   put (char x of tCardNum) parsed as number into tNum
   if 9 < 2 * tNum then
  ...
   end if

   Peter


--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Open Source Team

LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

> On 2 Mar 2016, at 7:38 AM, Peter TB Brett  wrote:
> 
> That "someone" would be violating the terms and conditions of their Indy (or 
> Business) license.
> 
> If they were *lucky*, they would promptly find that they didn't have their 
> license any more.
> 
> Needless to say, anyone trying such a thing will be viewed with _extreme_ 
> displeasure.

Yes and I’d be surprised if distributing via a build service would be allowed 
by the GPL work-for-hire clause either which would mean the distribution to the 
build service would need to be GPL so in this instance I think both would be 
violating the terms of their license. IANAL….

Cheers

Monte
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

LCB: Complex statement help needed in LCB

2016-03-01 Thread Stephen MacLean

Hi All,

I’m looking for some help on complex statements in LCB.

I’m trying to take a script statement like this:

if (char x of tCardNum)*2 > 9 then


into the equivalent statement in LCB.

While it will compile fine, calling the function that contains the code above 
with give the dreaded error :
execution error at line 2 (extension: error occured with domain) near 
"runtime", char 8

In the LC debugger.

tCardNum is defined as a variable of type “any”

Thanks,

Steve MacLean
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

2016-03-01 Thread Roger Guay

This doesn’t capture my part in this conversation. Personally, I am unconcerned 
about protecting my code/projects and I’m very happy to publish using the GPL 
license. But . . . BIG BUT . . . Apple won’t accept GPL, and I cannot afford 
the ever increasing price of the commercial license as a hobbyist. OTOH, I 
appear to be in a very small minority, so I’m done here!

Thanks and cheers,

Roger

> On Mar 1, 2016, at 1:09 PM, Monte Goulding  wrote:
> 
> On the whole this conversation seems to have steered in the direction of “How 
> do we deliver proprietary apps while using the GPL version”. I’m hoping we 
> can steer it back because such a discussion does the platform and the 
> generous terms with which we can use it a disservice. The simple answer to 
> all these issues is to use Community if you want to distribute under the GPL 
> and use Indy or above if you want to distribute under any license you choose. 
> If you aren’t sure it probably means you need Indy.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code


On 01/03/2016 20:18, RM wrote:


If by a "Publisher Partner" you mean getting someone who owns a licence
to the Commercial version
of Livecode to build you stacks from your standalones, that (while
possibly not being illegal) seems
sneaky and under-hand.

I suppose someone will try this trick sooner or later . . .


That "someone" would be violating the terms and conditions of their Indy 
(or Business) license.


If they were *lucky*, they would promptly find that they didn't have 
their license any more.


Needless to say, anyone trying such a thing will be viewed with 
_extreme_ displeasure.


Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Open Source Team

LiveCode 2016 Conference https://livecode.com/edinburgh-2016/

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Set the Opacity of a Button Background

2016-03-01 Thread Paul Hibbert

By adjusting some colour values and the ink mode I could achieve what I think 
you are looking for, however I may have misunderstood, because I don’t quite 
understand the bit about having 50% opacity of a clear background!

Link to demo stack with my interpretation: 
https://www.dropbox.com/s/xhjqlx0zhdeyq2f/Button%20Demo.livecode?dl=0

HTH

Paul

> On Mar 1, 2016, at 11:25 AM, Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami  
> wrote:
> 
> We looking at very simple button design:
> 
> 1)  Border color is on/white/2px
> 2)  background is set to clear (no color assignment and no icon)
> 3)  background opacity set to 50% # if we can figure out how
> 4)  Button name/label white
> 
> Now... I realize that if # 2 above is true, then possibly, since there are no 
> pixels at all in the background that the algorithm might not be possible from 
> a video card point of view... so we *could* set the background to white and 
> set the opacity to a grayscale?transparency value of say... 50%  but the idea 
> is that the text of the button name/label remains fully, 100% opaque, even 
> thought background has an alpha channel value (some level of transparency)
> 
> From my fiddling... (I could be missing something) this is not possible 
> either with buttons of fields  or graphics.
> 
> The use case is, again, as discussed in another thread: we want visibility of 
> the text on top of *any* image to be visible. We do this in print all the 
> time... but we cannot separate the blending of the text label or text itself 
> and the background of a button/field in LC... at least I have not found a way.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Export & LC8 & Browser widget

2016-03-01 Thread Tore Nilsen

It may not be the most elegant solution, but this works for me:

on mouseUp

put the rect widget "Chart" into tRect

add left of this stack to item 1 of tRect

add left of this stack to item 3 of tRect

add top of this stack to item 2 of tRect

add top of this stack to item 4 of tRect

export snapshot from rect tRect to tVar as PNG

put tVar into image "myImage"

end mouseUp


Tore
> 1. mar. 2016 kl. 20.57 skrev Tore Nilsen :
> 
> You must take the distance from the left egde of the screen and from the top 
> of the screen into consideration when you try to export a snapshot of a 
> browser instance. The browsers position is measured from the topLeft of the 
> screen, not the card I think.
> 
> Tore
>> 1. mar. 2016 kl. 20.41 skrev Terence Heaford :
>> 
>> I have been unable to get the Browser widget to print as I
>> suspect there is no option for this so I thought I would try a snapshot 
>> using this:
>> 
>> export snapshot from rect (the rect of widget "Chart") of this card to tVar 
>> as PNG
>> 
>> put tVar into image "myImage"
>> 
>> 
>> Unfortunately it does not capture the image in the correct rect of the card 
>> even though the dimensions seem correct.
>> 
>> Am I missing something in the application of the export snapshot command.
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> Terry
>> ___
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
>> preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> 
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Set the Opacity of a Button Background

2016-03-01 Thread Randy Hengst

It sounds to me that you want the color of the button to be 50% … meaning that 
the card (or whatever) below it will show though. And, you want the border and 
name of button to be opaque… if all that is correct, you might want to give 
this a try.

create an image in the color you want the button background to be … perhaps 
white (you can do that within LC with import snapshot). Then assign that image 
as the icon for the button (you’ll have to fiddle with sizing the image). Set 
the iconGravity of the button to “center”. Then adjust the blendLevel of the 
image and you’ll see that reflected in the button’s background.

If you just set the blendLevel of the button, then the name and border will 
also change opacity.

be well,
randy

Randy Hengst
www.classroomFocusedSoftware.com


> On Mar 1, 2016, at 1:25 PM, Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami  
> wrote:
> 
> We looking at very simple button design:
> 
> 1)  Border color is on/white/2px
> 2)  background is set to clear (no color assignment and no icon)
> 3)  background opacity set to 50% # if we can figure out how
> 4)  Button name/label white
> 
> Now... I realize that if # 2 above is true, then possibly, since there are no 
> pixels at all in the background that the algorithm might not be possible from 
> a video card point of view... so we *could* set the background to white and 
> set the opacity to a grayscale?transparency value of say... 50%  but the idea 
> is that the text of the button name/label remains fully, 100% opaque, even 
> thought background has an alpha channel value (some level of transparency)
> 
> From my fiddling... (I could be missing something) this is not possible 
> either with buttons of fields  or graphics.
> 
> The use case is, again, as discussed in another thread: we want visibility of 
> the text on top of *any* image to be visible. We do this in print all the 
> time... but we cannot separate the blending of the text label or text itself 
> and the background of a button/field in LC... at least I have not found a way.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On March 1, 2016 at 9:15:36 AM, RM 
> (richmondmathew...@gmail.com) wrote:
> 
> Do you mean that you want a button where an icon/image is set at 100%
> opacity and the rest of
> the button to, say, 50% transparency?
> 
> Would be grateful if you could clarify this.
> 
> Richmond.
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code




On 1.03.2016 22:09, Monte Goulding wrote:

On 1 Mar 2016, at 5:05 PM, Alejandro Tejada  wrote:

Why not publish your Apps for iOS
using a Publisher Partner?

Maybe an iOS Publisher Partner
selected among our very own
LiveCode fellow developers.

We discussed this during the original Kickstarter and I believe the discussion 
led to a clause in the commercial license that we could not build standalones 
for people unless we had done work to the value of at least an Indy license. 
Something like that anyway…. The idea being it would be more logical for the 
Community user to get their own license rather than work around the GPL by 
using a build service. I would hope that if someone is discovered running a 
build service they would have their license cancelled promptly.

On the whole this conversation seems to have steered in the direction of “How 
do we deliver proprietary apps while using the GPL version”. I’m hoping we can 
steer it back because such a discussion does the platform and the generous 
terms with which we can use it a disservice. The simple answer to all these 
issues is to use Community if you want to distribute under the GPL and use Indy 
or above if you want to distribute under any license you choose. If you aren’t 
sure it probably means you need Indy.

Cheers

Monte



If by a "Publisher Partner" you mean getting someone who owns a licence 
to the Commercial version
of Livecode to build you stacks from your standalones, that (while 
possibly not being illegal) seems

sneaky and under-hand.

I suppose someone will try this trick sooner or later . . .

Possibly one way of preventing this is for a stack made using the 
Community version to, somehow, encode the Mac address of the machine it 
was manufactured on, and if someone tries to generate standalones using 
a licensed commercial version of Livecode on a machine with a different Mac
address the whole thing would lock up [i.e. that Commercial version 
would instantly stop working].


Richmond.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open source, closed source, and the value of code

> On 1 Mar 2016, at 5:05 PM, Alejandro Tejada  wrote:
> 
> Why not publish your Apps for iOS
> using a Publisher Partner?
> 
> Maybe an iOS Publisher Partner 
> selected among our very own 
> LiveCode fellow developers.

We discussed this during the original Kickstarter and I believe the discussion 
led to a clause in the commercial license that we could not build standalones 
for people unless we had done work to the value of at least an Indy license. 
Something like that anyway…. The idea being it would be more logical for the 
Community user to get their own license rather than work around the GPL by 
using a build service. I would hope that if someone is discovered running a 
build service they would have their license cancelled promptly. 

On the whole this conversation seems to have steered in the direction of “How 
do we deliver proprietary apps while using the GPL version”. I’m hoping we can 
steer it back because such a discussion does the platform and the generous 
terms with which we can use it a disservice. The simple answer to all these 
issues is to use Community if you want to distribute under the GPL and use Indy 
or above if you want to distribute under any license you choose. If you aren’t 
sure it probably means you need Indy.

Cheers

Monte
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Export & LC8 & Browser widget

2016-03-01 Thread Tore Nilsen

You must take the distance from the left egde of the screen and from the top of 
the screen into consideration when you try to export a snapshot of a browser 
instance. The browsers position is measured from the topLeft of the screen, not 
the card I think.

Tore
> 1. mar. 2016 kl. 20.41 skrev Terence Heaford :
> 
> I have been unable to get the Browser widget to print as I
> suspect there is no option for this so I thought I would try a snapshot using 
> this:
> 
> export snapshot from rect (the rect of widget "Chart") of this card to tVar 
> as PNG
> 
> put tVar into image "myImage"
> 
> 
> Unfortunately it does not capture the image in the correct rect of the card 
> even though the dimensions seem correct.
> 
> Am I missing something in the application of the export snapshot command.
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Terry
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: beggars be choosers


On 3/1/2016 12:50 PM, Mark Waddingham wrote:

On 2016-03-01 19:45, RM wrote:

On 1.03.2016 20:44, Mark Waddingham wrote:

On 2016-03-01 19:20, RM wrote:

On 1.03.2016 20:15, stephen barncard wrote:

you guys are too intellectual for me...{ducking}


So, if you aren't going to let me have a tin, where's the duck?


You'll be asking for a duck in a tin next! ;)


Now you mention it . . .


I must confess I had to google 'duck in a tin' after posting that just
to see what came up... Not the most appetising collection of images, I
must confess!


It was just a little malicious teasing. It was mock duck.

--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Export & LC8 & Browser widget

I have been unable to get the Browser widget to print as I
suspect there is no option for this so I thought I would try a snapshot using 
this:

export snapshot from rect (the rect of widget "Chart") of this card to tVar as 
PNG

put tVar into image "myImage"


Unfortunately it does not capture the image in the correct rect of the card 
even though the dimensions seem correct.

Am I missing something in the application of the export snapshot command.


Thanks

Terry
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Set the Opacity of a Button Background


Here's a demo of what I just wrote:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/63u8h6sb0gk2yjo/Button%20Games.livecode.zip?dl=0

Richmond.

On 1.03.2016 21:25, Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami wrote:

We looking at very simple button design:

1)  Border color is on/white/2px
2)  background is set to clear (no color assignment and no icon)
3)  background opacity set to 50% # if we can figure out how
4)  Button name/label white

Now... I realize that if # 2 above is true, then possibly, since there are no 
pixels at all in the background that the algorithm might not be possible from a 
video card point of view... so we *could* set the background to white and set 
the opacity to a grayscale?transparency value of say... 50%  but the idea is 
that the text of the button name/label remains fully, 100% opaque, even thought 
background has an alpha channel value (some level of transparency)

 From my fiddling... (I could be missing something) this is not possible either 
with buttons of fields  or graphics.

The use case is, again, as discussed in another thread: we want visibility of 
the text on top of *any* image to be visible. We do this in print all the 
time... but we cannot separate the blending of the text label or text itself 
and the background of a button/field in LC... at least I have not found a way.





On March 1, 2016 at 9:15:36 AM, RM 
(richmondmathew...@gmail.com) wrote:

Do you mean that you want a button where an icon/image is set at 100%
opacity and the rest of
the button to, say, 50% transparency?

Would be grateful if you could clarify this.

Richmond.
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Set the Opacity of a Button Background




On 1.03.2016 21:30, RM wrote:



On 1.03.2016 21:25, Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami wrote:

We looking at very simple button design:

1)  Border color is on/white/2px
2)  background is set to clear (no color assignment and no icon)
3)  background opacity set to 50% # if we can figure out how
4)  Button name/label white

Now... I realize that if # 2 above is true, then possibly, since 
there are no pixels at all in the background that the algorithm might 
not be possible from a video card point of view... so we *could* set 
the background to white and set the opacity to a 
grayscale?transparency value of say... 50%  but the idea is that the 
text of the button name/label remains fully, 100% opaque, even 
thought background has an alpha channel value (some level of 
transparency)


 From my fiddling... (I could be missing something) this is not 
possible either with buttons of fields  or graphics.


The use case is, again, as discussed in another thread: we want 
visibility of the text on top of *any* image to be visible. We do 
this in print all the time... but we cannot separate the blending of 
the text label or text itself and the background of a button/field in 
LC... at least I have not found a way.


Um, well, at the risk of annoying you somewhat . . .

I have almost always "rolled my own" buttons just because of the 
limitations on Livecode-native

buttons.

I use GIMP with a series of layers (nothing particularly original or 
difficult there): one for the
'button' (rectangle with rounded edges), one for the image, and one 
for the label. Then one can

fiddle around with levels of transparency as much as one likes.

Richmond.


Oh, I'm sorry, I fired that one off a bit too quickly.

The faux buttons made in GIMP have to be imported and used as images in 
Livecode, because PNG
images with differing levels of transparency seem to lose the 
transparency when they are used

as icons inwith actual buttons.

R.







On March 1, 2016 at 9:15:36 AM, RM 
(richmondmathew...@gmail.com) wrote:


Do you mean that you want a button where an icon/image is set at 100%
opacity and the rest of
the button to, say, 50% transparency?

Would be grateful if you could clarify this.

Richmond.
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
subscription preferences:

http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode





___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Set the Opacity of a Button Background




On 1.03.2016 21:25, Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami wrote:

We looking at very simple button design:

1)  Border color is on/white/2px
2)  background is set to clear (no color assignment and no icon)
3)  background opacity set to 50% # if we can figure out how
4)  Button name/label white

Now... I realize that if # 2 above is true, then possibly, since there are no 
pixels at all in the background that the algorithm might not be possible from a 
video card point of view... so we *could* set the background to white and set 
the opacity to a grayscale?transparency value of say... 50%  but the idea is 
that the text of the button name/label remains fully, 100% opaque, even thought 
background has an alpha channel value (some level of transparency)

 From my fiddling... (I could be missing something) this is not possible either 
with buttons of fields  or graphics.

The use case is, again, as discussed in another thread: we want visibility of 
the text on top of *any* image to be visible. We do this in print all the 
time... but we cannot separate the blending of the text label or text itself 
and the background of a button/field in LC... at least I have not found a way.


Um, well, at the risk of annoying you somewhat . . .

I have almost always "rolled my own" buttons just because of the 
limitations on Livecode-native

buttons.

I use GIMP with a series of layers (nothing particularly original or 
difficult there): one for the
'button' (rectangle with rounded edges), one for the image, and one for 
the label. Then one can

fiddle around with levels of transparency as much as one likes.

Richmond.






On March 1, 2016 at 9:15:36 AM, RM 
(richmondmathew...@gmail.com) wrote:

Do you mean that you want a button where an icon/image is set at 100%
opacity and the rest of
the button to, say, 50% transparency?

Would be grateful if you could clarify this.

Richmond.
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Set the Opacity of a Button Background

2016-03-01 Thread Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami

We looking at very simple button design:

1)  Border color is on/white/2px
2)  background is set to clear (no color assignment and no icon)
3)  background opacity set to 50% # if we can figure out how
4)  Button name/label white

Now... I realize that if # 2 above is true, then possibly, since there are no 
pixels at all in the background that the algorithm might not be possible from a 
video card point of view... so we *could* set the background to white and set 
the opacity to a grayscale?transparency value of say... 50%  but the idea is 
that the text of the button name/label remains fully, 100% opaque, even thought 
background has an alpha channel value (some level of transparency)

>From my fiddling... (I could be missing something) this is not possible either 
>with buttons of fields  or graphics.

The use case is, again, as discussed in another thread: we want visibility of 
the text on top of *any* image to be visible. We do this in print all the 
time... but we cannot separate the blending of the text label or text itself 
and the background of a button/field in LC... at least I have not found a way.

On March 1, 2016 at 9:15:36 AM, RM 
(richmondmathew...@gmail.com) wrote:

Do you mean that you want a button where an icon/image is set at 100%
opacity and the rest of
the button to, say, 50% transparency?

Would be grateful if you could clarify this.

Richmond.
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Set the Opacity of a Button Background




On 1.03.2016 21:11, Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami wrote:

I may have asked this before, but am I the only one who wishes we could set the 
opacity of the background of a button to discrete levels without having to 
change the blend level of the whole button?

Yes, I realize that we can create a graphic object behind the button and set 
that, then make the button 100% transparent, set the graphic 1 layer below the 
buttonand group the two etc.

But if one is dynamically creating buttons based on some JSON or XML then you 
have to double-up so to speak on creating objects, making sure the layer of the 
graphic is just right etc..

Worth of an enhancement request? or perhaps there is a way already that I have 
not discovered?

BR




Do you mean that you want a button where an icon/image is set at 100% 
opacity and the rest of

the button to, say, 50% transparency?

Would be grateful if you could clarify this.

Richmond.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Set the Opacity of a Button Background

2016-03-01 Thread Sannyasin Brahmanathaswami

I may have asked this before, but am I the only one who wishes we could set the 
opacity of the background of a button to discrete levels without having to 
change the blend level of the whole button?

Yes, I realize that we can create a graphic object behind the button and set 
that, then make the button 100% transparent, set the graphic 1 layer below the 
buttonand group the two etc.

But if one is dynamically creating buttons based on some JSON or XML then you 
have to double-up so to speak on creating objects, making sure the layer of the 
graphic is just right etc..

Worth of an enhancement request? or perhaps there is a way already that I have 
not discovered?

BR


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: beggars be choosers




On 1.03.2016 20:45, RM wrote:



On 1.03.2016 20:44, Mark Waddingham wrote:

On 2016-03-01 19:20, RM wrote:

On 1.03.2016 20:15, stephen barncard wrote:

you guys are too intellectual for me...{ducking}


So, if you aren't going to let me have a tin, where's the duck?


You'll be asking for a duck in a tin next! ;)

Mark.



Now you mention it . . .

R.


Come to think of things . . . I can think of something I'd far rather 
have . . .


I set up a stack in Livecode 8.0 DP 15 using a script employing revMail 
(see earlier posting)
and it sent a message out through my e-mail client [exactly as it said 
on the tin],
but the script did not work when the stack was converted into HTML5 code 
via the

standalone builder.

I'd far rather have the information necessary to get e-mail messages 
sent from an HTML5
"standalone" via e-mial clients (and, ideally, via a web-browser for 
those computers that

don't have configured e-mail clients).

Richmond.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: beggars be choosers




On 1.03.2016 20:44, Mark Waddingham wrote:

On 2016-03-01 19:20, RM wrote:

On 1.03.2016 20:15, stephen barncard wrote:

you guys are too intellectual for me...{ducking}


So, if you aren't going to let me have a tin, where's the duck?


You'll be asking for a duck in a tin next! ;)

Mark.



Now you mention it . . .

R.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: beggars be choosers

2016-03-01 Thread Mark Waddingham


On 2016-03-01 19:45, RM wrote:

On 1.03.2016 20:44, Mark Waddingham wrote:

On 2016-03-01 19:20, RM wrote:

On 1.03.2016 20:15, stephen barncard wrote:

you guys are too intellectual for me...{ducking}


So, if you aren't going to let me have a tin, where's the duck?


You'll be asking for a duck in a tin next! ;)

Mark.



Now you mention it . . .


I must confess I had to google 'duck in a tin' after posting that just 
to see what came up... Not the most appetising collection of images, I 
must confess!


Mark.

--
Mark Waddingham ~ m...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
LiveCode: Everyone can create apps

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: beggars be choosers

2016-03-01 Thread Mark Waddingham


On 2016-03-01 19:20, RM wrote:

On 1.03.2016 20:15, stephen barncard wrote:

you guys are too intellectual for me...{ducking}


So, if you aren't going to let me have a tin, where's the duck?


You'll be asking for a duck in a tin next! ;)

Mark.

--
Mark Waddingham ~ m...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
LiveCode: Everyone can create apps

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Licensing questions again