Hallo
i know I am just pain in the ass. just for UX-design
The point names are getting really messy. No clue to solve. Maybe instead of a new suffix, hide/delete old. I have no clue if it is possible.
Hallo
i know I am just pain in the ass. just for UX-design
The point names are getting really messy. No clue to solve. Maybe instead of a new suffix, hide/delete old. I have no clue if it is possible.
Again… I hate to keep harping it, but it’s the same fact that the tools in a pattern are sequentially built. In the case of point names for op’s tools you can only change the suffix , as it uses the name of the source object as it’s basename to generate the point name on the fly. There’s a good reason for this… what of you have 10 points you want to add to a move operation… how are you going name all those points? And what if you want to further move those points again? And how are you going to write naming code that is easily maintained?
You mean like putting the source objects in a group and hiding the group?
Or hiding individual pointnames?
A_a1 and A1_a1 pointnames hidden:
Or maybe creative suffixes to reduce the clutter:
Also you can move the point names. Obviously this would be a mess:
Another (worse?) option would be to place the new points via individual formulizing of a new tool-use for each point. But I’m pretty sure that would be a worse user experience for the vast majority of users.
Personally, I generally avoid the Move operations, & when I do, make the suffixes be without underlines.
This would be an option. Right now I do it manually.
I thought stupid stuff. Instead to make a new point, the coordinates of the point will be overwritten. I was not aware of the fact these points will be final and adjustments in the construction will not have influence on this points anymore. (just a old white man, here)
Usually I do not use the standard suffixes. Until now I did not find a good solution. Actually there are more glyphen as _ ’ # which are usable? I use them already in other cases.
This probably sounds a bit daft, but I’ve been playing with using the side seams as “sliders” where the base remains constant, but with point that goes beyond the base side seam to the width of the rotation. Then, on the seam slider, there’s a point that goes up & down the side seam to the distance of the base side seam and the curve/spline gets drawn between the new side seam and the point of origin.
This is a short bell sleeve. The cap height and width are both adjusted automatically with the width of the wrist edge and are all controlled by variables.