Re: [Inkscape-devel] Inkscape review

Bryce Harrington wrote:

• The "Text and Font..." dialog was really difficult for me to find; I assumed it'd be under the Object menu and had to look through all the other menus before I found it under Edit. It was also strange that it was at the bottom of the Edit menu instead of at the top, like the property dialogs in the Object menu.

So it's not just me :)

• Now, of anyone, I probably know best where the marker settings are, however it really seemed hard to get to. I kept thinking, "Hmm, where's the line properties again? Oh yeah, the Fill dialog box..." I'm not sure how this could be improved but it struck me as counter intuitive.

Ditto.

• Shouldn't New Window really be called Duplicate Window or Clone Window or something? I assumed this command would do the same as New.

New View?

2. I notice the performance isn't quite as "snappy" as I seem to remember.

Perhaps a consequence of fixing bugs? It's not horrible, but noticeable.

are you compiling with -O2? with O2 I've found we haven't slowed much down from release 0.36.

5. I think we need to rethinkify the calligraphic tool. I played with it

for half an hour to see if I could get something worth putting in the article but didn't like anything I made. Does anyone use this? What is it useful for?

I think we should replace it with a constant angle brus

• The arrow style markers work wrong. The tip of the arrow should be located at the end node of the line. Instead, the end node is at the middle of the arrowhead. This means that if you draw a line to a box, and then put an arrowhead on it, the arrowhead will be partially *inside* the box.

Problem here is the SVG spec - the end of the arrow would then always be as wide as the line. I think we can really only hack around this by allowing the user to drag the path by the tip of the marker.

• I half expected to be able to hit the "Convert Object to Path" button and be able to have the marker converted into node path for manual editing. No idea if that'd actually be of real value, though.

It would be logical.

njh