On 6/12/2013 9:10 AM, Darien Caldwell wrote:
> Well, given Oz's recent revelation that there's over 1600
> different version of the SL client logging in daily, sure, it's
> possible someone is still using a client that doesn't support
> llTextBox().
The 1600 channels weekly figure misleading sin
On 6/12/2013 4:02 AM, Stickman wrote:
> It was recently argued to me against the use of llTextBox because
> of a warning on the wiki regarding its behavior on non-supported
> clients.
>
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/LlTextBox Not supported in official
> Linden Labs viewers prior to version 2.4
On 6/12/2013 7:02 AM, Stickman wrote:
> ARE there any TPVs (or official viewers) that don't support llTextBox?
> I thought it was universal by now.
Officially, 1.23.5 is still on the active list, in the "not formally
supported" category but not blocked.
But, virtually any client that can display
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Darien Caldwell
wrote:
> Well, given Oz's recent revelation that there's over 1600 different version
> of the SL client logging in daily, sure, it's possible someone is still
> using a client that doesn't support llTextBox().
>
> Does every major TPV that still upd
Well, given Oz's recent revelation that there's over 1600 different version
of the SL client logging in daily, sure, it's possible someone is still
using a client that doesn't support llTextBox().
Does every major TPV that still updates their client have it? Yes.
So I wouldn't let edge cases stop
It was recently argued to me against the use of llTextBox because of a
warning on the wiki regarding its behavior on non-supported clients.
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/LlTextBox
Not supported in official Linden Labs viewers prior to version 2.4,
and some TPVs may not support it. Unsupported vi
