I've been experimenting successfully with obtaining all properties
of an object and storing them in a custom property, then later
recreating the object from the property on the fly.
I would imagine it gets more complicated with groups - I haven't done
this yet - but then the whole group could be stored in a custom
property set! A group would also have to have other properties
included besides the built in ones, such as scripts and positions of
the objects contained within the group. One could probably store
these as properties of the group itself. The group would be the
'first out' for parsing, and other params needed could be pulled from
it.
Groups within groups would necessitate some recursive code, and more
complexity. But that is often rare unless one wants to deconstruct
and reconstruct a complete stack in this manner!!
But Ken is totally right - 'copy group' is a lot easier!
sqb
Otherwise, you can't really store a true group object inside a custom
property AFAIK - you could store the binary of a stack with one card that
only had your group on it, or you could store the specifications of all the
objects that make up the group and then build it from scratch each time
based on the specifications for each object.
But personally, I'd suggest the "copy group" approach...
Ken Ray
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
