On Saturday, December 28, 2002, at 08:58 AM, Dar Scott wrote:
I got numbers that are not consistent with this. (see my mail yesterday) I think "the number of backgrounds" refers to total number of groups directly on or placed on cards of the stack. I suspect that nested groups are not counted. I will have to run more tests to be sure.This is exactly correct. I agree that it might be a bit confusing, but I think the rationale is this: a background is a group that can be placed onto a card. A nested group cannot be placed onto a card, except if its owner is placed onto the card (which will include any nested groups). A group that is enclosed in another cannot be used as a background, and therefore is not a background.
On Saturday, December 28, 2002, at 09:34 AM, Dar Scott wrote:
I apologize. I didn't mean to ignore your suggestion. I was aware of the behavior of "there is a group" and "there is a background". I went on to show that "the number of" had the same problems and both were not consistent with "the groups of" and "the backgrounds of".I don't think there is a "the groups of" construct. You can get the groupnames of a card, and the backgroundnames of a stack.
But are people confused by this?You're right above. "there is a background" means there is a non-enclosed group of that name somewhere in the stack.
I would guess that some people are under the impression that "there is a background" means that there is a group with background behavior set somewhere in the stack by that name. That would not be the case.
I would guess that some people are under the impression that "there is a background" means that there is a group somewhere in the stack by that name. But, it doesn't work that way on my system."there is a background" _does_ mean there is a group somewhere in the stack by that name. However, the reverse is not true: there can be a group named "bob" in a stack, and 'there is a background "bob"' could still return false. This would be the case if group "bob" were enclosed in (a part of) group "sally"
I would guess that some might think that if 'there is a group "alpha"' is true, then 'there is a background "alpha"' is true. I see counterexamples.Same as above. If group "alpha" is part of group "omega" then group "alpha" cannot be a background -- it cannot be "placed onto" a card.
I would guess that some might expect "the number of lines in the backgrounds" to be the same as "the number of backgrounds". This is not the case.If you're referring to the backgroundNames or the backgroundIDs, you're right and I agree with you. The backgroundNames and backgroundIDs return a subset of the backgrounds: the ones that have the backgroundBehavior set to true. I agree that's confusing. But you can easily write:
function myBackgroundNames()
put empty into tReturnList
repeat with i = 1 to the number of backgrounds of this stack
put the short name of background i & cr after tReturnList
end repeat
return tReturnList
end myBackgroundNames
I would guess that some might think that 'there is a background "alpha"' is the same as '"alpha" is among the lines of the backgrounds'. I would guess otherwise.
See above.
This is in addition to confusion areas. We have these three (at least):I agree that backgroundBehavior can be misleading. But it would be misleading to use a name that didn't include "background" since its function is to make groups/backgrounds work like backgrounds in HyperCard. Maybe change it to HCBackgroundBehavior ;-)
1) The use of "background" in background behavior vs. "background" in some subset of groups associated with a stack.
2) The inconsistent use of "background" in the subsets of groups associated with a stack. (As described above)The inconsistency is the result of attempted HyperCard compatibility. I never set backgroundBehavior to true, so I'm not too familiar with any issues it might cause.
3) The inconsistent path for groups that do not have background behavior set.
Somewhere along the way you asked what others call these things. I always think of them as groups. I only use the term background when I'm placing one onto a card. I think Ken pointed out the syntax supports this as well. If you put the name of a background, you'll get group "whatever"
regards,
Geoff Canyon
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
