A shame?!
For the specific use that I have, which is comparing the properties of two nodes on different objects, the snap makes the feature unusable. I can see that in the majority of cases it is useful, but in my case it breaks what I am trying to do. I know you can't please everybody, and I am particularly hard to please >:-> (the corollary to this is that I have become accustomed to disappointment :-)
Spiff:
In a proprietary drawing package i used in a previous life, removing a single node from a path would do a "simplify" in a small sense: it would automagically change the control points of the surrounding (one or two) nodes so that the path maintained as close a fit to the original path as possible.
I think that would be excellent. In addition, if this does get implemented, I can't see the value in retaining the current behaviour as an option. Maybe a check-box, but the behaviour you describe should be the default. IMO.
__________________________________________________ Phil Hibbs | Capgemini | Rotherham Technical Consultant __________________________________________________
This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message.