Converting old Quark applescript to InDesign - problems

Question

Hello
I'm converting an old Quark applescript to InDesign CS3 finally. I'm having a problem with placing, scaling and adjusting images.
Here's how it works ... a user fills out a Microsoft Word form, which a designer unlocks and pastes into the layout, and then runs the script. The image frames are all labeled, and that's how I'd like to call them.
Here's a snippet of the Quark portion that I'm having a problem with ...
set Todayicon to item (offset from list Dayicons of Todayval) of DayIconEPS
set Todayiconpath to (OPIpath and Todayicon as string)
set Todayicon to item 1 of Todayiconpath
set scale of Todayicon to {"65","65"}
set offset of Todayicon to {"-1p2","0p5"}
And here's what I'm thinking I need to do in InDesign CS3 ...
set Todayicon to item (offset from list Dayicons of Todayval) of DayIconEPS
set Todayiconpath to (OPIpath and Todayicon as string)
set Todayicon to item 1 of Todayiconpath
set TodayiconTransformationMatrix to make transformation matrix with properties {horizontal scale factor:0.65, vertical scale factor:0.65, geometric bounds:[-14,-5]
transform Todayicon in inner coordinates with matrix TodayiconTransformationMatrix
Unfortunately, the script errors out when it tries to make the transformation matrix, even though I'm following the examples in the Working with Tranformations in Applescript pdf.
Any ideas? I guess I can put dummy images in the layout and call a "Place" to override the dummy images, which should keep the scale, but it doesn't help me when I need to offset the images sometimes.

Answer 1

Philip Regan wrote: "The new scripting model with all of its touted advantaged is really poorly executed."
While I didn't design the scripting model for transformations, and disagree with some of the decisions made in the design, I understand that InDesign's transformations architecture had to be rewritten for CS3. There were too many cases in CS2 where objects could not be returned to their original coordinates after transformation. The scripting implementation pretty much had to go along with the change in the underlying architecture.
If you'd rather things work the way they worked in CS2, why not use the set of transform "wrappers" that I wrote and included in the transform tutorial? With those functions, you don't really need to worry about the new model.
Thanks,
Ole