Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcvax!kth!sunic!sics.se!ollef From: ollef@osiris.sics.se (Olle Furberg) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hypercard Subject: Re: Copying a background Message-ID: <2671@osiris.sics.se> Date: 11 May 89 23:53:52 GMT References: <39528@bbn.COM> <30160@apple.Apple.COM> <445@nyevax.CAS.ORST.EDU> <2667@osiris.sics.se> Reply-To: ollef@sics.se (Olle Furberg) Organization: Swedish Institute of Computer Science, Kista Lines: 52 Keywords: In article rich@sendai.ann-arbor.mi.us writes: >Are you folks using backgrounds with no fields or buttons? No I have buttons, fields, graphics _and_ script in my backgrounds. >If your >backgrounds *have* fields, how do you expect them to be translated >into the new background, short of wiping them all clean? Simple: the content of field number K in the old bg goes into field number K in the other bg. If the number of fields in the other bg is less than the old you get an alert: =========================================================================== The number of fields in this background exceeds the number of fields in the target background. If you proceed you will lose the contents of field ## to field ##. CANCEL GO ON! ============================================================================= >If you are really working with empty backgrounds (ie, paint only), >then maybe a more useful tool would be a rectangle select that can >pick cut/paste multiple combinations of buttons/fields from card to >card. That would be great, shift-click to extend a selection etc! >This way you could copy the entire non-background part of a >card onto a new card with a presumably different background. No! You would lose the card script and the contents of the fields. To summarize: I want the following commands: 1. Move a single card to another bg 2. Move all cards sharing one and the same bg to another bg 3. Change a bg to a _copy_ of another bg for a single card 4. Change a bg to a _copy_ of another bg for all cards sharing one and the same bg (N.B. 2 (3) decrease (increase) the number of bg. In 1 and 4 the number of bgs is unchanged) Two questions: Is 2 (4) _really_ a generalisation of 1 (3) ? /Olle