Curious about why Arrowsheads should not extend from the line length.

The recent thread in the Dear Xara forum: http://www.talkgraphics.com/showthread.php?t=46955

This is not the first time the subject has been brought up on the forums.

I have never seen the way the arrows currently function as a problem.

May I be enlighten as to why others think otherwise?

When I have made real arrows for use with a bow, the nock and arrowhead are added to the ends, not embedded within the shaft length. :);)

The way I see it is that an arrow will often be pointing at something specific, so it is important that the arrow tip remains on the target point even if the line width is subsequently changed.

With the current system a change of line width will resize the arrow head and so the tip will move.

Lines with embedded arrow ends would be easier to use and very useful for quoting in a technical drawing.

Also, note that when you use an arrow to point some elements in a drawing you lose the exact point if you decide to change the line weight.

Luciano
See file

Hi Bill,

First, I have no problem with the arrows; they are easy enough to adjust.
I see your point, but, generally, aren't arrows used to point to something with the 'point' of the arrow (usually) falling on a desired spot? CAD (and Corel) users would probably see this as the expected/preferred behavior.
:2c

If I decide to change the width of the line an arrowhead is attached to, I would expect to have to adjust it's position relative to what is being pointed out. This is only logical to my way of thinking. Increasing or decreasing the area covered by the shaft and arrowhead demands a reposition relative to objects within the same plane that are not increased or decreased in size.

If other software works differently, they must be using some "flawed" logic; from my view point. ;))

I'm afraid this is probably a subject that will have many differing view points but none will persuade me to change my brand of "logic". :)

"I shot an arrow into the air,
It fell to earth, I knew not where;"
[because it didn't 'point' where I expected it to.]
Henry Wadsworth Longfellow (1809–1882), U.S. poet. The Arrow and the Song

;)

Ah but Bill, wouldn't it be even better if I didn't have to adjust my end point at all because if it is already touching the object that it is pointing to and in the right place? Changing my line width shouldn't mean I have to change my line length.

Think flow chart software. There are many examples of this that work the way I think arrows should.

The way it works now, once I draw the line (which I have to do first no matter what) and then apply arrow head and end, I ALWAYS have to readjust my line. That is just a bunch of extra steps IMHO and in no way logical. Again IMHO, when I draw an arrow from something and to something, I want it to start and stop exactly where I start and stop where I draw it. I don't think I'm anywhere near alone on this one.

Just my $.02

Eric

Hi Eric,

Flowcharts are something I always did by hand, before computers were able to run anything but block graphics.

If I changed the width of a line I must redraw the flowchart and reposition all the elements. :D

If the line required to be resized that meant the entire flowchart was too small for it's desired purpose.

OK Bill,

Not getting through to you with the flowchart analogy, let's go with work flow.

The way it is now (the way you think is 'normal'):
Draw a line from A to B
Apply Arrow head and tail
Choose Arrow head node.
Nudge with arrow keys until point is at B
Choose Arrow tail node
Nudge with arrow keys until tail is at A

The way that I and others are asking that it work in the future.
Draw a line from A to B
Apply Arrow head and tail

My way is much shorter and more simple because I have already placed the line ends where I want them. This seems logical to me.

Eric

Sorry Eric, but that does not seem logical to me. The Arrowhead must be added to the existing line length otherwise your line must be shortened by the size of the arrowhead. This means your original line length was not accurate for the intended purpose to begin with.