Re: [artworks] What's in a name?

  • From: Martin Wuerthner <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: artworks@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 13:17:28 +0200

In message <4e21b4f3f7bric@xxxxxxx>
          Brian Carroll <bric@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> I don't think I have actually used arrowheads in Artworks but
> the non-coincident effect in Draw has always been an irritation.
>  What I can't understand, now you have eliminated the 'problem',
> is why anyone would want to retain the original behaviour.  If
> not, why the need for a button?

All the arrows in existing documents have been drawn to look correct 
with the old, non-coincident behaviour. Of course, the appearance of 
existing files must not change. Besides, it would be foolish to force 
everyone to use coincident arrows only. Some users may simply be used 
to them and in some situations one might still want the arrow to start 
at the end of the line. It is best to give users a choice.

> As far as the name is concerned 'Coincident' is accurate if one
> knows the background of the topic from earlier releases, but it
> would be pretty mysterious, I think, for a newcomer. Exactly
> what objects are coincident, they will wonder.

Yes, but I wonder whether there is a better wording. An option button 
label cannot always tell the complete story and sometimes, one might 
even have to read a manual... Besides, in this particular case, there 
is even a preview box, so when the "Coincident" option is enabled, 
there is instant visual feedback that should explain the purpose.

Martin Wuerthner           MW Software          lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Other related posts: