OpenXTalk Lite 0.92 Download Links...

[richmond62]

Do you mean there appears to be something where I've drawn the red rectangle?

Well, YES, but a bit bigger in all directions.

Even if I do something totally daft, as in set the layer of my pink horror to 3000 [which makes NO sense at all as there are NOT 3000 objects on the card] it is still obscured.
-

Screen Shot 2023-10-08 at 16.45.07.png (146.06 KiB) Viewed 2078 times

[tperry2x]

Well, YES, but a bit bigger in all directions.

How curious. I'll put the detective hat on and go rummaging!

[tperry2x]

Perhaps in that case it's something being added via script and being set to the top layer?
I don't know.
There seems to be something very large lurking as part of the 'Navigation' group.

Screenshot at 2023-10-08 14-48-24.png (386.57 KiB) Viewed 2076 times

[richmond62]

Ah . . . for the first time I was using the Project Browser: serve me right for being 'clever'.

Making the 'Navigation' group taller does nothing:
-

Screen Shot 2023-10-08 at 16.54.27.png (613.48 KiB) Viewed 2072 times

[richmond62]

Oddly enough, on the hidden card 'RevOnline' my 'Fish' image can be shifted downwards and is NOT obscured:
-

Screen Shot 2023-10-08 at 17.00.50.png (203.37 KiB) Viewed 2062 times

[richmond62]

GOTTIT !

It is the dimensions of the 'Appearance' group:
-

Screen Shot 2023-10-08 at 17.04.54.png (271.09 KiB) Viewed 2056 times

[tperry2x]

Ah, makes sense.
Am I right in thinking you were looking to extend the height of the preferences dialog, so you can fit more controls in?

I'd just quickly put something together to list things in groups.
I might make my own App Browser / Project Browser.... "UI Browser?"

all_I_found.png (182.71 KiB) Viewed 2045 times

Paul, this isn't something you are currently working on is it?
Just thinking about duplication of effort again. I'd like to merge the Project Browser and App Browser, but I'd rather make my own from scratch rather than use what's already there. That'll keep me entertained

[richmond62]

to extend the height of the preferences dialog, so you can fit more controls in?

Yes, quite right, although I am starting to feel a bit lumpy about using buttons there to modify script-only stacks [especially as cross-platform they tend to have different file paths].

I might make my own App Browser / Project Browser.... "UI Browser?"

I wish you luck: certainly at the moment one can jump back and forth as they both have good points, and both have bad ones: which is a bit of a pain in the bum.

Oh, by-ther-way, are "Our friends in the north" able to pinch any of our additions/changes and roll them into LC? I am not at all sure how things sit with us tweaking an 'open sausage' thing, and its subsequent pinchability?

[tperry2x]

Well the only thing I'd point out is for once I think LC did something right on the preferences stack.
On the 'Script Editor' card, rather than make the window much larger, they made the list scroll.

Although I wasn't a fan of this and wondered why they'd done it, that became all-too-clear when I tried to open this on an old mac and found that with only 870 px of height to play with, I needed all the space I had.
minus the menubar (22px), minus window controls (x2) - I was running out of space.
I know the window is about 400px high if memory serves, so I'd probably not want to go more than 600px high before scrolling becomes needed for smaller screens.

[tperry2x]

Oh, by-ther-way, are "Our friends in the north" able to pinch any of our additions/changes and roll them into LC? I am not at all sure how things sit with us tweaking an 'open sausage' thing, and its subsequent pinchability?

Well, this is something I raised in the past on here. In fact, I think it was one of my first posts.
I am pessimistic until proven otherwise when it comes to people I'm afraid, so I did mention about the fact there is no legal reason as to why they can't just borrow what they feel like. Morally, it's objectionable, but then nobody can take them to task over that.

Particularly when they are doing things like trying to claim the language is theirs.

Almost worth downloading a copy of their commercial offering, or if not wanting to put yourself through that, at least get screenshots of it, and see if anything 'finds it's way in' *cough* from OXT?

If it does, I don't think we'd be unreasonable to ask them to point us in the direction of a Sonoma fix at the very least!

[richmond62]

In my school, where I sometimes teach xTalk programming, my computers are hooked up to monitors with a resolution of 1024 x 768 pixels, and I am 'conditioned' to produce stuff for that resolution, and I would be very much surprised if anyone is using a smaller resolution monitor.
-

Skool.jpg (150.27 KiB) Viewed 2038 times

[richmond62]

Almost worth downloading a copy of their commercial offering

This is proving a bit difficult as every time you want a trial version you have to use a different email address . . . not that that stops me.

One of my hobbies is to download one of those rather silly kiddos computer games and examine the FUNCTIONALITY, and then imitate it in xTalk: because, while code can be protected and copyrighted I do not believe functionality can be . . .

At this point I have to defer to FourthWorld.

So, from time to time it might not be a bad idea downloading a copy of their commercial offering to see if there is any new functionality we like and can imitate.

[tperry2x]

..my computers are hooked up to monitors with a resolution of 1024 x 768 pixels, and I am 'conditioned' to produce stuff for that resolution, and I would be very much surprised if anyone is using a small resolution monitor.

I'd think of 1024 x 768 as being a small monitor.
I know in our school, pretty much everything is set to 1920x1080 on 24" monitors. Only a small minority tend to change their resolution to anything like that (they probably go as low as 1280x720). By the time you factor in a menubar, window controls, the menubar stack (with icons showing) and a taskbar (win/linux) or MacOS dock in the way - you don't have a lot of space left to play with.

[tperry2x]

it might not be a bad idea downloading a copy of their commercial offering to see if there is any new functionality we like and can imitate.

This was kind of what I was banging-on-about recently. It's not the concept that is copyrighted, it's the implementation that we can't copy. Although I probably have that all wrong... I'm not a legal-eagle

(not that this stops them at all). They could simply copy & paste our code verbatim if they so desired. Not saying they necessarily would.... but they could.

[richmond62]

I think that we can heighten the revPreferencesGUI stack to 600 pixels without any worry.

[tperry2x]

I think that we can heighten the revPreferencesGUI stack to 600 pixels without any worry.

Yes, certainly the days of most users using 800x600 resolution should be past now.
Otherwise, they'll just have to drag the window around (although they would be stuck for doing this on the mac).

[FourthWorld]

One of my hobbies is to download one of those rather silly kiddos computer games and examine the FUNCTIONALITY, and then imitate it in xTalk: because, while code can be protected and copyrighted I do not believe functionality can be . . .

At this point I have to defer to FourthWorld.

I am not an attorney, and nothing I write can be construed as legal advice.

Personally, it's hard to imagine anything there design-wise that would be all that inspiring. They have brilliant engineers, but AFAIK they've never had a role on the org chart for a UX specialist.

If you're looking for ideas, you might find the work of the design team at Appli.io interesting...

[richmond62]

Functionality does NOT always mean UX.

There might be some NEW code in newer LC releases that makes things doable in a way that is not in OXT.

While we should not pinch the code, we can write new code to produce the same result/function.

[richmond62]

The HyperStudio people are STILL only requiring an 800 x 600 pixel display, which surprises me:
-

Screen Shot 2023-10-09 at 23.05.56.png (191.66 KiB) Viewed 1968 times

[OpenXTalkPaul]

I'd just quickly put something together to list things in groups.
I might make my own App Browser / Project Browser.... "UI Browser?"
all_I_found.png

Paul, this isn't something you are currently working on is it?
Just thinking about duplication of effort again. I'd like to merge the Project Browser and App Browser, but I'd rather make my own from scratch rather than use what's already there. That'll keep me entertained

No, but it is something I planned to look into, mostly because of several bugs in PB.
I found a bug where certain sounds embedded into stacks don't show in Project Browser but do show in App Browser.
and there's times when the PB should refresh its list, when certain IDE event messages happen, but it doesn't.
I planning on just working on the existing Project Browser (which seems a bit unfinished to me), but If you build something to replace it that's entirely new from scratch that would be great. I'd be interested in testing that.

I was planning on spending some time to finish making OXT tools palette from the ground up (I started that a long time ago now), one that is more scalable, theme-able, horiz/vert adjustable size, and extensible friendly.

I would also like to really start trying to recompile the Engine parts. I've been thinking about possibly hiring a pro consultant to help us a bit with that a bit? I don't know if we would even need to, or if we can get funding to do it, but it's something I've been thinking about for some time.