intersect . . . invisible images

[Richmond Mathewson]

If intersect looks for existence rather than appearance why does it tale 
transparency levels into consideration?

R.

On 7/14/17 7:19 pm, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode wrote:
> I'm not sure why the explanation would be difficult. Existence is 
> different from appearance. Intersect looks for existence at a 
> particular location, visibility is how the object looks.
>
> Substitute "blue" for "visible" and it's the same thing.
>
>
> On July 14, 2017 5:03:09 AM Richmond Mathewson via use-livecode 
> <use-livecode at lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>
>> It does seem illogical that while one can set levels of transparency
>> with interset
>> an image can continue intersecting with another when it is, supposedly,
>> invisible . . .
>>
>> Certainly, having to explain THAT to children is going to make them take
>> an even
>> more dim view of adults than I hope they do already.
>
> -- 
> Jacqueline Landman Gay         |     jacque at hyperactivesw.com
> HyperActive Software           |     http://www.hyperactivesw.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode