The main benefit I see to keeping the current destructive operations is that they apparently take the Join type into account. I linked an image (1) which shows how the Join affects Outsetting.

Also linked is an image (2) comparing Outset to Offset. The results differ for each of them with the Offset producing the cleanest result (by far). I will say though that there are aspects of the Outset results which could be sylistically desirable (the G outset 1px 5 times on the right text looks interesting to me).

If I recall correctly, they use the same code under the hood, however Offset seems to not be influenced by join type. This to me would be the biggest drawback of an Offset only approach with how it currently exists. I did try to get the experimental Offset LPE into play here, but it is broken and can also easily trigger crashes. In LPE form, it would be nice to have the ability to toggle either a "cusp" mode, or to take join type into consideration.

(1) http://i.imgur.com/IRUbglT.png
(2) http://i.imgur.com/VtU9KTa.png

Just my .02 on it atm.

Cheers,
Josh

On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 7:05 AM, Dmitry Kirsanov <buliabyak@...400...> wrote:

I support removing linked offset - it was added long ago, before even
clones were made usable, and has nasty bugs. Unfortunately we'll still
have to support them under the hood so that the old files render
properly (at least until 1.0?) but I hope they can be eventually
retired in favor of LPEs with clones.

As for simple non-dynamic offsets, however, I'd hate to see them go -
it's so easy and intuitive to use, without having to bother with any
LPEs, knots, etc. I think both "plain simplify" and "plain offset"
that act destructively on a path need to be preserved. The fact that
you can't easily adjust the amount is no more harmful than the fact
that you can't do that for moving by arrow keys: using Alt (1 screen
pixel) with zooming and Shift (10x) is usually a good enough solution.
Yes, these actions are not revertible other than by Undo, but that's
their whole point.

On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Krzysztof Kosiński <tweenk.pl@...400...> wrote:
> Currently there are four offset-related items in the menu, but we
> actually need only one, Dynamic Offset. It could be renamed to Offset
> or Offset Path.
>
> The current Inset and Outset items are practically useless, because
> they use a fixed, non-configurable width (or it's hidden somewhere in
> the prefs). Linked Offset is redundant, because this action could be
> represented by using Dynamic Offset on a clone.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Regards, Krzysztof
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos.
> Get unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available
> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> _______________________________________________
> Inkscape-devel mailing list
> Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos.
Get unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available
Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
Inkscape-devel@...1794...s.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel