--- bulia byak <buliabyak@...400...> wrote:
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 23:15:11 +0200, David Christian Berg <david@...407...> wrote:
Gosh, come on, I really prefer the simple "shapes" as opposed to "paths". We don't need to through in useless words, just because companies like doing that.
I agree in principle, but this document is being written for AI users, who may have trouble understanding too succint explanations without a dose of marketing-speak :)
For the user manual, yes, these should be just "shapes". The "live shapes" metaphor can be used once in explanations, but not more.
yeah, the point is we're trying to differentiate between the shape tools their used to where as soon as its created it becomes a path, and the parametric nature of our tools. The term "live shapes" is just to differentiate between the dumb shapes in AI and our smart ones. Kinda thing we should explain once then go back to refering to just shapes.
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/