I want to make a controller button prompt in my game where it says 'Press X to Join', but I want the X to be an actual graphic of the 'X' button, like how it is in many games. How would I go about doing that? Right now I'm just putting a big space in my prompt text and putting a UI Image of the button in it, but I want to know if there's a better way about it.
For the sake of scaling to different resolution sizes, you would wanna scale the anchors of the UI elements correctly and have an appropriate parent-child relation tree in Unity's hierarchy.
The red box is the hierarchy.
The 2 green boxes shows ways of scaling the anchors.
The orange box shows the end result of it.
Anchors in combination with their relative position, allows Unity's UI elements to scale up and down according to screen size.
So for example if you say that an anchor is at 0.25x, that would be that its anchored at 25% of for example the x axis. Same goes if you set it for the y axis, just the vertical instead of horizontal anchoring.
You can use the anchors to adjust a minimum and a maximum anchor which the elements may float within, they may have the same value as well, then it's a fixed anchor point.
To clarify, I suggest that you use a panel to hold 2 text elements and the image with the X, each text element being on the left and right side of the X instead of having spacing inside the UI text elements. To keep correct spacing you then must use anchor points. This way your spacing stays correct despite changing screen and resolution sizes.
Please note that the "left", "top", "right" and "bottom" values are then relative to the anchor points. So if you move "left" 5 pixels, those 5 pixels will be out from the relative anchor point.
Here's the values I used:
My left text is at 0.25x, right text is at 0.8x, image is at 0.5x.
The panel holding the 3 is at 0.2 minimum x to 0.8 max x, same goes for y axis.
The largest parent panel is stretched to max fit in the canvas.
Related
I've been messing around with UI Automation and Scrolling. I found that in notepad if you take the bounding rectangle of the scrollable window, subtract out the size of any scrollbar bounding rectangles, it scrolls perfectly. However, trying the same thing against ISpy++, which aligns the top treeview item perfectly on each scroll even when there may be one or two pixels of the next item in the view at the bottom.
The problem with that is it reports the scroll amount requested was set. Say the view was 6.384914% and you do all the math to calculate where you scroll the view to the next window, say it came out to 24.382102 (completely made up number), so you scroll there, but it really didn't because it aligned the top item which otherwise would be missing a few pixels based on height of window. You read back where scrolling decided to set it and it says it was 24.382102 (note that when the scroll actually moves a full item it does report a different final scroll position and so can be calculated out).
What would solve the above is if we knew the actual bounding rectangle of the view that represents the 6.384914% so that those extra pixels wouldn't be considered part of the view, when you move to the next page, you're now align to where the next page would actually start. In this case of the tree, the bounding rectangle would be aligned to all items that fit plus the final spacing (or that could be part of the top of the view).
I wanted to scroll and get the data perfectly without any overlaps (except on final page of course, but that could be calculated out when you have the proper aligned boundaries that matches scrolling) or extra spacing.
Is there a way to do that, that I'm missing?
TIA!!
Trying to wrap my head around this particular use case of D3 v4 zooming. My example so far is available here:
http://bl.ocks.org/gmarler/f6d17432f6eea34318bff477eb9ebd27
I'm able to get my initial Partition Layout to draw as required (I've left out complexities such as text positioning and color), but I'm not getting very far with zooming properly.
The goal is to zoom whenever one of the svg rect elements is clicked on.
And by "zoom", I mean something somewhat different than the stated default behaviors:
Completely disable anything other than a click on an element - no drag, panning, or mouse wheel activity normally associated with D3 zoom.
When an svg rect element is clicked on, the element expands (or contracts) in the X dimension only, such that its left side abuts the left side of the top level svg's g container, and its right side abuts the right side of the top level svg's g container.
In other words, the element clicked on becomes exactly the width of the chart.
All other g/rect elements vertically "above" the clicked one should scale/translate appropriately.
All other elements vertically "below" the clicked one don't really need to change, as the one we've clicked on will take up 100% of the width of the chart container.
So, here's how far I've gone:
I've calculated the scaling factor (k) - not sure I've done it right. The goal is to set the scaling factor to whatever will make the width of the clicked element expand/contract to the width of the svg.
And I've calculated the transform for x (tx) to be whatever will cause the left side of the g element encapsulating the rect element to align with the left side of the svg.
Using k and tx, I create a zoom transform with d3.zoomIdentity.translate(tx, 0).scale(k)
Now I select all of the g elements that contain rects, tear the current transform="translate(x,y)" apart, and apply the zoom transform to the x portion of the translate - this should move the left side of the element to the left side of the svg
Next, I select the rect under each g element, and apply the zoom transform to the width attribute
This seems to get me closer to the end goal, but I'm sure I'm missing something:
Is it really necessary for me to tear apart the transform="translate(x,y)" the way I am for the g elements?
If I click on certain elements more than once, the scaling keeps increasing. I need to both:
Keep the original zoom ratio so that I can reset to it, or go back to it simply by clicking on the lowest rect element
If an element is clicked on, it's already at 100% width - I need to never allow scaling past 100% width
clicking on any given element the first time expands it to 100% width as expected, but not all elements' ancestors properly scale - I don't care if the the ancestors expand either end past the edge of the viewport, but some of the ancestor elements leave the viewport entirely, which I cannot account for.
I'm using auto layout in Xcode and I have some buttons I want to be near the center, but not on it. I know I can use alignment constraints to be exactly in the center, in this menu:
However, I want to not be exactly in the center, lets say 50 pixels up and to the right. How can I do this? I'm sure it's an easy thing to do, but I can't seem to find anything elsewhere on the web.
If you want the center of your button to be 50 points up and to the right of the parent view's center you can use a center x alignment constraint and a center y alignment constraint and set the center x alignment constraint's constant to 50 and the center y alignment constraint's constant to -50.
Create a view with size 50 * 50. Then place this view exactly at the center using auto layout.
Next you need to place your button using vertical space and horizontal space in order to be aligned to the upper right corner of the view.
Finally make the view transparent.
Sorry for the bad title I don't really know how could I write it better. I want to create a colorpicker that's not very typical. There is the version where you can select the three vectors of HSB. It would be close to it but not at all. The main problem is why I don't use the usual colorpickers is that I have a very specific space to do it. I have 35 free objects that could be colored (these are filled circles with a black border) and not more. But I can place each object wherever I want. So how I imagine there would be a circle of 12-18 objects that are constats they would represent the HUE than when I select one the rest of the objects would be in the HUE circle and they would form a square. And why I call it tree: because you could select a color from the main circle than you get colors from that branch than you click on one of the colors in the got colors than you get colors from that color (but the clicked color is always part of the "zoomed" colors the best how you can imagine this like there is the HSB color space and in the first two clicks you select the HUE than you just zoom in the HSB color space than there is the two dimensional 101*101 S and B square and we zoom on the color. I really hope that you can understand me if not ask anything. And thank you for reading this long text.
Something like this:
The first, must know what is equation of HSB Color. The Algorithm to find this is in this with name HSV.
If you found, You can fill each color with choosen formula with hue you choosen and full saturation.
Add listener of click for that circle.
In listener, update the cicle inside with your choosen saturation and brighness. For example first row is sqaturation and brightness is column. Then in row 1 is no saturation, row 2 is half saturated(50) and row 3 is full saturated ones. The column 1 is the brightmost one(100) the 2 is half(50) and 3 is no brightness (0), for example.
Aclually it is not a tree, but a alternative approach for standard approach because it's more like that than tree.
I've been provided with 8 individual images (top left, top, top right etc) for a border around the main (fixed width) content box. If I was given a single image, I'd use border-image.
What's the best way to use the 8 images? Divs with absolute positioning? Or is it such a pain I should just combine them into one?
What's so hard about combining the images into one? It has numerous other advantages, like reducing the number of HTTP requests the client needs to make, for example.
An alternative is to use CSS3's multiple background image feature, where you'd set each image as a layer in your box.
Eric Myer used a technique whereby (just to explain technique) the image was a little circle. Then, that was the background graphic in four separate divs each abs positioned in the corners of a containing div w/relative position. Background position was changed for each and a regular border was used for the straight lines in effect getting rounded corners. The circle had to be filled with white or whatever bckgrnd color you used.
This way, one could expand. You still need to have the height expand should changes occur, right?
I'd make one for the top and bottom and a third that repeats on the Y for the middle, that way your box will expand if content is added. Height that is.