groups and background

[Robert Brenstein]

>>
>>All bg is unrelated, and control on card:
>>    control --> card --> bg4 |
>>                         bg3 |
>>                         bg2 v
>>                         bg1 --> stack
>>
>>All bg is unrelated, and control is included in bg3:
>>                bg4 ( no message )
>>    control --> bg3 --> card --> stack
>>                bg2 ( no message )
>>                bg1 ( no message )
>
>I guess the idea is that if a control is in a group, even a 
>background group, it is in the environment of that group or groups. 
>But if the control is directly on the card it is in the environment 
>of the card as modified by background groups.
>
>Even so, I am not able to rationalize why groups on the card or 
>nested groups and controls within those do not have a message path 
>like the first case.
>
>Dar Scott

It seems that the first case uses the logic that backgrounds are 
behind the card, whereas the second case seems to consider 
backgrounds as groups placed on a card (so the background is in front 
of the card so do speak. My guess is that the bg attribute of a grp 
is ignored in this case.

I would expect the second behavior to be for normal groups. They are 
on the card and the message should pass from them to the card. 
However, bg groups should be behind the card and the message passing 
should skip the card.

My 0.02 cents

Robert Brenstein