Krzysztof Kosiński wrote:
2010/1/22 LucaDC <dicappello@...2144...>:
Ok, let me say that we have different ideas on what "preserve shape" means. This means that we should discuss on this, rather than taking it as a starting point.
"Preserve shape" = "Preserve approximate look of the path", not "Preserve segment type" or "Preserve node type".
Well, this is your interpretation. I see no more strength in linking "approximate look" to "shape" rather than linking "type of shape" (i.e. straight) or "node type". More, if we are talking about "shape", the type of line is much more related to "shape" rather than "approximate look". What is more similar to a rectangle: an ellipse or a trapezioid? Too much subjective to be so sure about its correctness. Why not taking other programs as reference? Probably people is going to expect their behavior if they are consistent between them.
Krzysztof Kosiński wrote:
What about adding Ctrl+Shift+click as deleting a node without preserving shape? My concern is that the behavior of Del differs depending on the type of surrounding segments, and it's not possible to get one of the behaviors for nodes between two linear segments without extra steps. I would like it to always work the same, which is more consistent.
You think that the behavior differs from the programmer point of view, but from the user point of view it's exactly the opposite. I think that the behavior more expected and understandable from the user should be implemented. Also, accelerators are good for quick operations. But what if you want to delete a bunch of nodes? You select them and press del... Everywhere works in this way.
Krzysztof Kosiński wrote:
More, what you say is: - if you press a single key, Inkscape is going to change the type of the object you are working with, i.e. changing it's properties; - if you want Inkscape to preserve the object type and properties, you need to press a combination of two keys.
This was the case even before the rewrite. Try converting an ellipse to path and deleting one of its nodes. The surrounding nodes are changed to cusp nodes, and their handles are adjusted. Some properties of the path (types of nodes) are clearly not preserved.
And this still happens. Do you think that converting a smooth node to a cusp node is preserving the shape?
Regards. Luca