The problem is solved with no code necessary by simply setting the
autohilte property to off, as Marty revealed a couple of days ago.
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Bob Sneidar wrote:
> Name all your checkboxes with a special 3 character prefix. Have a mouseUp
> handler in your card or stack s
Name all your checkboxes with a special 3 character prefix. Have a mouseUp
handler in your card or stack script:
ON mouseUp pMouseBtnNo
put the short name of the selectedobject into theObjectName
IF char 1 to 3 of theObjectName is "chk" THEN -- for example
set the hilite of the se
Hi Robert,
Still trying different things here to see which seems to work best in these
circumstances. I have put a separate label, as you suggest, I think that
works well.
Pete
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Robert Brenstein wrote:
> On 18.02.2012 at 13:28 Uhr -0800 Pete apparently wrote:
>
>
On 18.02.2012 at 13:28 Uhr -0800 Pete apparently wrote:
In spite of all that, I share your concerns. Using the autohilite property
was a very easy way out of the original question but perhaps the image
approach might be better and not a lot more work if I use a behavior
script. If I make it loo
> I did think about the ui aspects of this and all the points you raise.
> The stack in question is very clearly defined in the application as one
> where all the information on it is display only and cannot be changed in
> any way. There are clearly labelled buttons on the stack that are used to
>
Thank you Tim, good to know there's a tried and tested way of doing this.
Pete
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Tim Jones wrote:
> I use a Green / Gray 8x8 button to display on or off status where user
> choice is not considered. This has worked well for over 8 years and
> there's never a point
I use a Green / Gray 8x8 button to display on or off status where user choice
is not considered. This has worked well for over 8 years and there's never a
point of confusion on the user's end.
Tim
On Feb 18, 2012, at 10:42 AM, Pete wrote:
> I have a stack which is used to show information in
Thank you for your thoughts, Ken and Ken.
I did think about the ui aspects of this and all the points you raise.
The stack in question is very clearly defined in the application as one
where all the information on it is display only and cannot be changed in
any way. There are clearly labelled bu
On 18/02/2012 17:42, Pete wrote:
I have a stack which is used to show information in a display only mode,
the user is not allowed to change any of the displayed values. I want to
use checkboxes in some cases. How can I prevent the user clicking the
check box and changing its state?
I've curren
> I've currently got them disabled to achieve this but I'd prefer them to
> have their enabled appearance, just not allow them to be changed. I've
> considered making images of the checkbox in its checked and unchecked
> state, disabling the checkbox and assigning the appropriate image as its
> di
Hi Marty,
No, you're not missing something, I am!! That works fine, thanks.
Pete
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 9:52 AM, Marty Knapp wrote:
> Pete,
> Maybe I'm missing something, but could you just turn off the auto-hiliting?
>
> Marty K
>
> I have a stack which is used to show information in a displ
Pete,
Maybe I'm missing something, but could you just turn off the auto-hiliting?
Marty K
I have a stack which is used to show information in a display only mode,
the user is not allowed to change any of the displayed values. I want to
use checkboxes in some cases. How can I prevent the user c
I have a stack which is used to show information in a display only mode,
the user is not allowed to change any of the displayed values. I want to
use checkboxes in some cases. How can I prevent the user clicking the
check box and changing its state?
I've currently got them disabled to achieve th
13 matches
Mail list logo
