Setting Active Segments

[Ocean West]

So I am mocking up vertical navigation bar to the left and have a slide panel to the right ( kind of like a left tab panel )

So each button is static text & icon, and each button targets one script and passes a parameter, to go to the desired slide panel.

Some times I have to switch layouts and on return script I target the correct slide panel but now trying to target the corresponding active segment - but it appears that it it requires each segment to be named too?

I feel like I am repeating myself to many times

• button is named the ( no point in making it 'dynamic' since the text has to correspond to the icon )
• script parameter is named - buried one level deep in HUD
• the segment is named ( inspector )
   

from examples I am seeing people seem just to name the segment something generic like nav_1 - nav_10 etc. 

curious how others handle this?

 

[bruceR]

Get any interesting answers on this? I sent you a direct message with attachment.

[LaRetta]

And the purpose of not sharing it is what, Bruce?

[Ocean West]

What i ended up doing is to name the segments in the inspector nav1 - nav7 and then i named the sliders: slide1 - slide7 

Then the script passes a parameter as number the script sets animation on and then goes to object "slide" & Get ( ScriptParameter ) and sets a variable  $$nav_active to "nav" & Get ( ScriptParameter )

 

[bruceR]

The purpose of not sharing is that I modified one of Daniel Wood's example files, 14for14_NavigationButtonBar, and it seems to be kind of questionable to present somebody else's file that way. Maybe it's not a big deal. 

[LaRetta]

I was just interested in what you did and we usually discourage off-sharing ideas when a question is posted since others reading the thread will also wish you would have presented it here.

As is, we still don't know your optional suggestion which might be useful at other times.  Anyway, thanks for explaining.   :-)

[bruceR]

Perhaps we could also ask Stephen (OW) to present his example file too.

[LaRetta]

That would be good also although Stephen explained his and I think we can take it from there.  Your approach is still invisible.  Maybe you could just explain it so we have rough idea at least?  

If not, that's okay ... I, and I'm sure others, would be curious.