On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 22:12:19 +0000 (GMT), Alan Horkan
You want to Include "Merge Visible" but not both with
I suppose that works, hadn't thought of it that way. Hopefully it wont
confuse artists with bad habits too much.
Siblings seems extremely confusing to me, I hardly ever use the word
siblings (brothers, sisters, family but almost never siblings) and I'm a
native English speaker and as I user I wouldn't be sure what exactly it
might mean (i did already have to ask) so it is bordering on complex
It's a standard term in XML and in pretty much anything tree-like. Our
layers are hierarchical, so it's natural for us to use it. How else
would you call layers which have the same parent as the current one?
I'm still trying to understand what exactly you mean. Are you
having an option called 'Merge sibling layers' that would merge the
current layer with the layer below it and also the layer above it?
Merge all layers that are under the same parent as this one.
seems like overkill, it is confusing because I think it would be a
enough use case.
Perhaps most of the time one would use "Merge down" to merge just two
layers. But there must also be a way to merge all siblings, and for a
parent, to merge all children into the parent.
> Also it may be useful to have a "Merge sublayers"
command that would
> remove all sublayers copying their contents to the parent layer.
This all seems very complicated to use and catering to very specialised
That's because there's no easy way currently to make sublayers. Once
this is in, they will be quite common I believe. Adobe has
hierarchical layers too.