Yes, it makes sense. manager_image.lua is purely there to write the extension info to the chat window. It's been there since version 1 of the extension. Putting a <version> tag in extension.xml used to report that version through the FG load campaign interface, it doesn't do that now so the only value it provides is if someone opens up the extension and looks at the code.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackfoot
Oh.. this is peculiar to THIS extension... not ALL extensions.. sorry.. gotcha. Usually I see this info in a data_common type file if I remember right.
Most extensions use this method. There's no point in updating a data_common file as this is a base ruleset file and would need updating every time a ruleset updated the data_common file -not good design at all. You might be confusing this with layered rulesets (not extensions), which use data_common.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackfoot
Recently added functionality allows the extension load chat message functionality to be added to the extension.xml file with an <announcement> tag. Over time I might move the chat announcement functionality into the extension.xml file, but there is *nothing wrong* with the process being used at present.
Sorry.. again my confusion. Doesn't it make the most sense for this identification code to be in the extension.xml file? Since every extension has one of those.. and many extensions don't mess with images at all?
I misspoke about data_common.lua.. I'm working with rulesets mostly right now and obviously that's a big thing there.
Dude. manager_image.lua is a non ruleset file that doesn't clash with anything - I could have called it anything at all - I could have called it my_brilliant_chat_message.lua file. I just called it manager_image.lua just because it is managing an image based extension.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackfoot
Thanks for the input, I know what I'm doing.
Trenloe.. I'm SURE you know what you are doing. :)
I sent you a PM to sift through the confusion without drama. :)
Hey Trenloe!
I'm looking at the Enhanced Images extension. How hard do you think it would be to add a fourth layer, called "effects"? I can think of some pretty cool stuff that could be put on that layer, above the others, but not interactive. (unless the effects layer was clicked).
It's pretty much as case of adding the new imagecontrol in the XML and then making sure all of the LUA codes that syncs up all of the layers includes code for the effects layer. And modifying the layer buttons and code behind those buttons. Not hard, just lots of little things to do. Then test, test, test...Quote:
Originally Posted by jreddin1
What's the general opinion of this extension? I've seen it used in a few of my games and it seems like it can be a pretty big hassle... is the hassle worth it?
Depends on whether or not you like your players spinning your decor. Personally, I like the feature and have been using it for my sessions. Granted it is fiddly to get used to, most of FG was that way for me in the beginning but after spending time browsing the forums and trying out what people suggested FG came together for me, not just Enhanced Layers Ext. Keep at it and like it did for me it will become second nature.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackfoot