Ken: Sounds promising. Is the size/location of the underlying checkbox predictable enough for this? i.e. it doesn't pixel-creep from platform to platform?
Mark Well, the closest you can get is to have a single image that shows the equivocal state that is put on top of a real checkbox, and is hidden. When the user clicks on the checkbox, you check the current state of the hilite and if it is true (checked), you show the equivocal image on top and allow the mouseup to continue (which will change the checkbox to cleared (unchecked), but beneath the equivocal image. Then when the user clicks on the image, you have script that simply hides the image. Then to find out the "state" of the checkbox, you'd just check the visible of the image - if it's showing, you're in an equivocal state; if not, you take the hilite of the checkbox. _______________________________________________ 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
