|
From: strk <st...@ke...> - 2006-07-02 21:38:21
|
On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 12:26:18AM +1000, Justin Clift wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > strk wrote: > > I've taken a loog again at this. > > I don't really think that Ming_setScale() should > > change the size of any imported bitmap, and I find > > behaviour in 0.3 more correct then in 0.4. > > I reverted Justin patch. > > No worries, thanks for discussing that first. > > :-/ I hope your not being sarcastic, I warned about the problem almost a month ago (see previos message in thread). > > Justin, if you can explain the rational for your > > change it could help finding a good strategy. > > Which patch? It's been a while... I remember changing a hard coded > scale value from 20 to actually use the value given by setScale, but > that's about it. As I said, the setScale function wasn't really having any effect on the embedded SWF size, that's why I reverted to the more sane scale of 20 (at least the SWF contains an image with size matching the input). --strk; |