On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 9:43 PM, bilbosax <waspenc...@comcast.net> wrote:

> I have written my first mobile AIR app.  On my iPad, the layout is a dismal
> failure.  It looks perfect in the simulator.
>
> I have the application set up to run in portrait mode with no
> auto-orientation.  It starts at 160 DPI and scales up.  When the
> application
> is complete, I get the width and height of the stage, and then use these
> numbers to calculate the layout of all of my buttons and column widths for
> my datagrid.  On the iPad, all of the buttons are spread way too far apart,
> several running off the screen.  The datagrid is all supposed to fit on the
> screen but four of the colums ran off the screen.
>

How are you getting the stage's width and height?  You should be using
stage.stageWidth and stage.stageHeight.


>
> It is almost as if it calculated the width of the screen in landscape mode
> instead of in portrait mode.  So I have two questions:
>
> 1) If you layout the application in portrait orientation, is the width of
> the stage the width in portrait orientation or landscape orientation?
>

It should start in portrait orientation, if you have set it in the
app-descriptor.xml file.


>
> 2) I am confused on how to lay everything out on mobile devices with
> varying
> screen densities. Is it better to get the app width and height and then set
> up distances and spacing in pixels, or to use percentages?
>

Best is to use percentages for layouts.  Also, create different skins for
different orientations and devices.  Use CSS media queries to specify the
appropriate skin.  [1]



>
> Thanks for any insight.  This was disappointing.
>

Sorry to hear that.  I am sure we can work this out :-)

Thanks,
Om

[1]
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/flex/using/WS2db454920e96a9e51e63e3d11c0bf62883-7ff2.html#WS19f279b149e7481c4a89460c12d804a111e-8000



>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://apache-flex-users.
> 2333346.n4.nabble.com/Mobile-Width-and-Height-tp13813.html
> Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>

Reply via email to