tter by Scott Rossi explaining how to do
> this.
>
> http://www.runrev.com/newsletter/may/issue70/newsletter3.php
>
> Martin
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Re-How-to-make-a-stack-transparent-but-the-fields-and-i
stack
There is an article in revup newsletter by Scott Rossi explaining how to do
this.
http://www.runrev.com/newsletter/may/issue70/newsletter3.php
Martin
--
View this message in context:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Re-How-to-make-a-stack-transparent-but-the-fields-and-images
In theory this should be doable as the system allows for it (I have an
external for Windows that does it) but cannot get it to work correctly
on Mac OS X
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe,
That's pretty cool alright.
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 11:18 PM, Scott Rossi wrote:
> go url "http://www.tactilemedia.com/site_files/downloads/transtack2.rev";
>
--
http://www.bluewatermaritime.com
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runre
Recently, william humphrey wrote:
> But the problem with this is that you can't move this stack around without
> immediately revealing that the transparent rect image is static. Is there
> some way (without keep getting a new rect to put in the background as that
> is too "jerky") to make a stack
*
We can do something like the following to get around the limitation of
making an entire stack transparent (in order to have the fields and images
on the stack be darker than the transparent "stack" image behind).*
*
*
**
*
on doRectCapture
*
*get* the rect of this stack
*hide* this stack
