El mar, 13-05-2014 a las 15:38 -0700, Josh Andler escribió:
Is there any real benefit to the knots being offset from their origin vs overlapping? Since by default, the fillet & chamfer knots are 10px (and 90degrees CCW) offset from their "origin", it is not very obvious what they're connected to.
See the linked image (1) to see how this is massively confusing. The top object has the knots offset to 0px and looks as expected, the bottom one is the default when the LPE is first applied. By default here, the green knots all correspond to nodes that they are fairly offset from. In this case the top-left node has a control knot that is overlapping the bottom-left node. The bottom-left node has a knot floating to the right of it. As a default this is really bad for usability imho.
Ok this ia a ugly problem. I solve putting the offset inside the same segment instead 90degrees CCW. I dont want to put a initial value of 0 offset because it make unselectable the node, because a default knot place over it.
One more suggestion (if possible) would be to add a field for "focused knot" which contains the numerical value of the last dragged or clicked knot. This would be nice to fine tune things for perfectionists without forcing them into the xml editor.
You can change it numericaly selecting the node, checking apply to selected nodes and change the radius, but you havent a visual value of actual distances, so is planned a knot dialog on a event to full configure it. You can: *Read actual values *Toogle fixed or relative *Also toogle fillet or chamfer *Numeric distance or porcentaje entry This is enought? Liam P. White use a similar dialog in his power stroke implementation [1], i get the base code from him.
@LiamW Whats your opinion to change the knot dialog to a double click? I want to use the same way than you but seems to me double click is better. I have a diff if you want to allow double click event on knots. Tell me about.
[1] https://code.launchpad.net/~inkscapebrony
Regards, Jabier.