On 2007-March-13 , at 16:39 , bulia byak wrote:
On 3/13/07, Diederik en Rezi <mail@...1689...> wrote:
- Both the 4 points AND the boundingbox (also 4 points) are
snapping, as requested in File -> Document Properties. 2) The origin is set to be at the boundingbox edge, as requested in File -> Inkscape preferences -> Tools -> Selector
[skipped]
This is what we could do:
- calculate the origin ourselves, instead of obeying the
preferences. Should this option even be removed from the preferences? Why is this option available to the user at all?
I think 1) is the best approach. That transform origin option is indeed very murky and hardly ever useful. It also has other bugs. I never liked it :)
Instead we're going to soon have another preference, similar but more general: whether the user wants to use geometric bbox (path only, no stroke) or visual bbox (with stroke). Correspondingly, the transform origin will _always_ be the edge of the chosen bbox, but the bbox itself may be different depending on user preference. This way those who prefer pure geometric bbox will have it in everything - in the visible frame, in snapping, and in transforms.
Further, perhaps by this change we will also be able to eventually get rid of the "snap bboxes/snap nodes" choice in document prefs. Selector will always snap bbox (although this bbox may be either visual as now, or including only nodes). Node tool will, naturally, always snap only nodes. Less preferences overall and a saner, more predictable experience. What do you think?
I know the question was not asked to me but I just step in to say that this will really be a nice improvement. Right now snapping behavior is quite difficult to understand and gives unexpected results when snapping both to nodes and bbox on objects with a large stroke (strange thing to do probably but the possibility is offered by the prefs dialog). In addition, will objects measurements also change with this bbox preference change? For example, when snapping to nodes (i.e. in the future geometric bbox context) I would expect my objects to have dimensions which are multiples of grid units (10cm x 10cm for example) whatever the size of their stroke. With current system, which also measure stroke width (inaccurately when units are not px everywhere furthermore), it's difficult to actually use the position/ dimension spin buttons to place objects precisely. Good luck with these changes.
JiHO --- http://jo.irisson.free.fr/