World: r3wp

ok, I just thought that editing text might be heavier, if it didn't 
consist of several gobs.

as I understand it, you can have whole UI in one gob - if your UI 
will be done as one draw dialect block. probably not the fastest 
way anyway :)

correct.

so, can gobs be instanced? like many faces that share the same font 
object

what I don't like (but the design is still not finished so this may 
change) is that there is separate draw and effect block. I think 
R2 way (draw in effect) is much more flexible. Probably merging those 
two dialect would be best.

rebolek, most of the times you are not using both. and using layered 
gobs is going to be faster, probably.

Gabriele, you should check code of some of my demos if you think 
I'm not using both ;) But if layering is faster then OK

i expect layering to be faster, because if you change one layer, 
it is not always necessary to recompute the other layers.

but... you guys need to ask these questions to cyphre :)

henrik: current docs do not talk about anything that could be shared, 
except the effect/draw/text blocks themselves.

that is, there is no font subobject.

i assume font object is referenced from the text block, so if you 
reference the same from many text blocks you are sharing it.

gabriele, ok, bad example. I was thinking more like for a star field, 
you could use one gob, referenced many times.

they would all have the same offset and size then :)

ok, so you reference one image in many gobs?

so, you'd have many gobs, maybe referring to the same effect or draw 
block.

or image - yes.

yep, ok

on gob:

Carl: "Ask if they remember what great graphics system used "boogers 
and goobers".  ;)"

Carl: "If we had to pick worldwide perfect names, we'd have very 
few to pick from.


Also, when you define a word, it is context dependent. It very rapidly 
takes on its new meaning and loses the out-of-context meaning.


Also, if they can create a better 3-letter name that starts with 
G -- then I am open to hearing it.  But, it must happen very soon."

goo :-)

:)

i'll wait a day or so then collect proposals and send them to Carl. 
don't keep your hopes to high though ;)

so it has to start on "G"?

gfx

but then gob! is maybe a better name, it just sounds kind of devilish 
to me :-)

Gabriele said: "i assume font object is referenced from the text 
block, so if you reference the same from many text blocks you are 
sharing it."


my question is - is current aproach replacement for classes which 
were proposed for R3 initially? - http://www.rebol.net/r3blogs/0035.html

VIS - view image structure , and the french word for face :)

So far proposed words:

gob! face! gfx! cell! atom! layer! vis! sprite! bob! blit!

well, I added few others :-)

well, if face is about to stay as highere level organisation of gobs, 
and we have facets, feels, what about eye? :-)

multiple eyes in your face :-)

ris .. raw image structure .. = laugh

rebol image structure

laugh? to laugh? maybe smile? but smile is already kind of multimedia 
W3C thingy - SMIL

i like gob for graphic-object.. has a nice simplicity about it.

well, we have amiga devices, many amigans would be familiar with 
sprite, and general publicity with layer, others are pretty much 
cryptic ....

sprite does not describe the gob usage

it would confuse people

but gob is not an object :-) Well, but I get your point. IMO Carl 
let us talk for a few moments and then we will realise that we stick 
to gob :-)

;-)

besides.. ive already started coding some stuff using make gob! :P

how can you, if you don't have R3 yet? :-)

VAIS - view atomic image structure

facs .. face c structures

face image c-structures  - fics

aww ..give up

im in the process of converting existing code based on the R3 presentation 
of Carl :)

just waiting on the richtext info really..