Implementing the Mac "Quick Look" type of window

Richmond Mathewson richmondmathewson at gmail.com
Tue Apr 13 05:03:05 EDT 2010


  On 12/04/2010 23:17, Andre Garzia wrote:
> Fill an enhancement request on the QA Site and I will vote for it!
>
> :D

I'm missing something: I know the QC (= Quality Control) centre, but I don't
know the QA centre . . .

> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 4:33 PM, Richmond Mathewson<
> richmondmathewson at gmail.com>  wrote:
>
>>   On 12/04/2010 22:17, Andre Garzia wrote:
>>
>>> Richmond,
>>>
>>> You can't do that with Rev... In Rev all elements inherit the stacks own
>>> blendlevel :-(
>>>
>> Blast!
>>
>>
>>   If you are not moving your stack, you can take a screenshot of the screen,
>>> crop it, set it as background of the stack with a clever image with a
>>> blend,
>>> then it will look like the effect you're trying to achieve but if the
>>> window
>>> moves, the background will not move with it...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Richmond Mathewson<
>>> richmondmathewson at gmail.com>   wrote:
>>>
>>>     On 12/04/2010 20:30, stephen barncard wrote:
>>>>   <snip>
>>>>> Anyway, a facsimile of the Quick Look window shouldn't be that hard to
>>>>> do
>>>>> with 4.0's graphic effects.
>>>>>
>>>>>   >Wow; Cowabunga!
>>>>>
>>>> http://andregarzia.on-rev.com/richmond/STUFF/FREAKY.rev.zip
>>>>
>>>>   well, it took this "genius" about 3 minutes (and that is because he's
>>>> slow!).
>>>>
>>>> I have just uploaded a new version of this which shows up a slight
>>>> problem:
>>>> while it is a breeze to set the blend of a stack to, say, 50%; there is
>>>> no
>>>> way
>>>> that I can find to stop objects in the stack from inheriting that blend
>>>> value.
>>>>
>>>> My stack contains an image "DEVO" which I would like to have a blend
>>>> value
>>>> of 0; and it does; but, because it inherits the blend value of the stack
>>>> that
>>>> is overridden and the image is still partly transparent.
>>>>
>>>> I think that those smoky, grey (whoops; "gray"), semi-transparent windows
>>>> in Mac are really very sexy; but they would be a lot sexier if they could
>>>> be
>>>> used to contain/present fully opaque objects (such as images).
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________




More information about the use-livecode mailing list