![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/bb65b6b3a109d97cf9f8d6c014ede042.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
29 Mar
2005
29 Mar
'05
9:20 p.m.
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.