0> In article <20060802014643.aw9cvukcdps0wc48@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, 0> saulgoode <URL:mailto:saulgoode@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ("saulgoode") wrote: saulgoode> 2. In a couple of places I employed the term "selection saulgoode> frame" in order to differentiate operations that affected the saulgoode> selection mask versus those that affected the selection's saulgoode> contents (e.g., 'script-fu-selection-rounded-rectangle' is saulgoode> described as "Round the corners of the current selection saulgoode> frame"). I feel that "selection frame" is more intuitive saulgoode> than "selection mask" in these contexts. Other ideas: "selection boundary", "selection bounds", "selection outline", "selection edge". Do any of these make more sense? saulgoode> 3. Many scripts will operate on the non-transparent portion saulgoode> of the active layer (i.e., where the alpha channel is not saulgoode> BLACK) if there is nothing selected. I have termed these saulgoode> "alpha objects" and consistently employed the phrase "an saulgoode> alpha object or selection" to describe this situation. If saulgoode> a better terminology is proposed to describe this, it saulgoode> should be a simple matter to change these using "sed". "Opaque" is the natural opposite of "transparent". Does that help here? saulgoode> 4) I do not understand what is happening with the saulgoode> 'script-fu-gap-dup-continue' portion of the patch. I saulgoode> only changed the blurb but for some reason the entire saulgoode> file is shown as added lines. (The patch works, I just saulgoode> don't understand why.) Wild guess, without looking at it - line-end conversion? _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
