On 08/09/2011 08:30 AM, Krzysztof Kosiński wrote:
W dniu 7 sierpnia 2011 23:34 użytkownik Diederik van Lierop <mail@...1689...> napisał:
That would be a mess! There are simply to much possible snap sources and snap targets to give them all an individual toggle. Besides, we do not enable snapping bounding boxes to paths and vice-versa, see [1] for an explanation. This is what's being communicated by dividing the snap toggles in three groups. Although I agree that the snapping toggles could be more intuitive, I don't know of an easy solution that would fit all.
I'm not advocating snapping between bboxes and nodes, but I think that when you turn on the snap toggle for smooth nodes, they should both snap and be snapped to.
I'm currently refactoring snapping preferences code, which turned into quite a mess over the past few years. After that's been finished, it will be easier to do some experimenting with the snap toolbar and try to find out what works best. We could try if the distinction between snap sources and snap target should be removed, and if we should remove the group toggles.
This way we could also get rid of the rather unintuitive group controls (snap bboxes / snap nodes / snap other).
IMHO these group toggles are quite handy; I use them a lot myself. These could be removed, but currently they also implicitly serve to toggle snapping of many snap sources and targets which don't have a toggle them selves (such as image corners, quadrant points of ellipses, etc). So removing them would require adding at least one new, and would also hurt my productivity. I know, _my_ workflow should not be leading ;-)
Diederik