Theres so MUCH content in the forum, it seems to take over the results.
Might be better to have it in a separate engine, and if there is still an
online dictionary, set one up for that too.
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 8:16 AM, Peter M. Brigham wrote:
> +1 -- bookmarked!
>
> -- Peter
>
> Peter M. B
+1 -- bookmarked!
-- Peter
Peter M. Brigham
pmb...@gmail.com
http://home.comcast.net/~pmbrig
On Aug 17, 2015, at 11:39 AM, Mike Bonner wrote:
> Its pretty easy to set up a custom search engine in google. I created a
> cse restricted to 4 sites. www.livecode.com forums.livecode.com
> lessons.
Björnke's Docu2 dictionary tool.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 9:02 AM Richard Gaskin
wrote:
> William Prothero wrote:
>
> > Regarding tagging, searching, etc, I’ve experienced very primitive
> > search boxes and they can be extremely primitive. (read useless
> > almost). It is very difficult to bu
William Prothero wrote:
> Regarding tagging, searching, etc, I’ve experienced very primitive
> search boxes and they can be extremely primitive. (read useless
> almost). It is very difficult to build a great search system. Google
> has done that. It is possible to get Google to index web pages.
>
Its pretty easy to set up a custom search engine in google. I created a
cse restricted to 4 sites. www.livecode.com forums.livecode.com
lessons.livecode.com and the nabble site. I'm sure there are settings that
might help it work better.
Like all google search, you can improve results with quote
Folks:
My initial comment arose because I, through searching the dictionary, couldn’t
find how to get the group name of a control that was in a group. The best
result I had was by searching with google. I could enter something like: “How
do I get the group name of the group that a control is wit
> The spec is here:
>
> https://github.com/runrev/livecode-ide/blob/develop/Documentation/guides/Extending%20LiveCode.md#documentation-markup
>
> We need to make it easier to find -- I'll see what I can do to make that
> happen.
Oh, thanks
I was looking in https://github.com/runrev/livecode/tr
On 2015-08-17 04:04, Monte Goulding wrote:
On 17 Aug 2015, at 12:46 pm, Kay C Lan
wrote:
I appreciate this is a bit late to the game, and this Doc Team may
already be heading in a certain direction, but I'm wondering if
there's been an thought of adopting some kind of 'Industry Standard'
docse
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Monte Goulding
wrote:
>
> It’s a nice easy format that would be simple for LC community members to
> contribute changes. Indeed you could easily do it all on line via GitHub’s
> document editor. Perhaps that was one of the design goals but as long as we
> don’t
> On 17 Aug 2015, at 12:46 pm, Kay C Lan wrote:
>
> I appreciate this is a bit late to the game, and this Doc Team may
> already be heading in a certain direction, but I'm wondering if
> there's been an thought of adopting some kind of 'Industry Standard'
> docset format?
I don’t know the proce
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 12:04 AM, Richard Gaskin
wrote:
>
>
> We definitely need tagging in the Dictionary, something I'll be pushing for
> as we finally get the ball rolling with the Community Documentation Team soon.
>
> With searchable tags anyone can add terms that will help others find relev
Pending updates to the dictionary, I have a plugin available that lets you
add your own notes to dictionary entries and also tag them with keywords of
your choice. Unfortunately, the details are local to your computer and not
available to other users.
It can be downloaded at http://www.lcsql.com/
William Prothero wrote:
> Richard:
> This is an example of how difficult it can be to find docs on an
> operation that isn’t commonly used and that doesn’t have “obvious”
> syntax.
...
> Perhaps if there was a dictionary based, not on livecode commands,
> but on operations that the user wants to p
Hi Bill,
If you can send me a list of words and connected issues that you would
like to be able to search for in the index, I'll consider adding them in
the book I'm currently writing or in any future publications.
--
Best regards,
Mark Schonewille
Economy-x-Talk Consulting and Software Eng
Richard:
This is an example of how difficult it can be to find docs on an operation that
isn’t commonly used and that doesn’t have “obvious” syntax. Even the livecode
books by Mark Schonewill and Colin don’t allow for finding this kind of
information, especially in the index. If the contents of
Richard:
Hmm…. Thought I tried that. But, I tried it again and it worked. Thanks for the
info.
put the short name of the owner of me into tGroup —works fine.
Best,
Bill
> On Aug 14, 2015, at 5:28 PM, Richard Gaskin
> wrote:
>
> William Prothero wrote:
>
> > “the long name of me” is a complet
William Prothero wrote:
> “the long name of me” is a complete reference to an object, which
> contains the group name. What I was trying to do is get the name of
> the group that the button is in. I can parse it from the long name of
> me, but thought it would pull it out of “me”.
>
> Anyway, wha
Would it work for you needs by just putting this in the button script?
put the owner of me
be well,
randy
Randy Hengst
www.classroomFocusedSoftware.com
> On Aug 14, 2015, at 6:56 PM, William Prothero wrote:
>
> Alex:
> “the long name of me” is a complete reference to an object, which contain
Alex:
“the long name of me” is a complete reference to an object, which contains the
group name. What I was trying to do is get the name of the group that the
button is in. I can parse it from the long name of me, but thought it would
pull it out of “me”.
Anyway, what do I know? If I’m wrong t
Is it valid to say (in the mouseUp script)
. of grp me into
Isn't 'me' a button, so "grp me" is unclear ?
[ or did you mean to sayput the short name of grp tGroup into ... ? ]
-- Alex.
On 14/08/2015 23:50, William Prothero wrote:
Folks:
I just encountered what appears to be an er
20 matches
Mail list logo
