Gradient colour for a line

[David O'Neil]

post #7 ?

As convoluted.

[handrawn]

David - if you were to make the line a shape - give it a gradient - how then do you move it as a line - in one mouse click and drag?

Its a shape is it not - both sides of the 'line' are now independent and have to be moved separately?

And if you move the shape in that way by some means the gradient does not follow with the line either - as gradients are always masked fills in xara are they not - rather than stroked to path?

[David O'Neil]

David - if you were to make the line a shape - give it a gradient - how then do you move it as a line...

Selector tool, click, and move.

[Soquili]

David I think what Steve is saying is how do you change the line's path after it is converted to a shape.

[handrawn]

yes - thanks Bill

this is what was discussed up front in this thread - and what is good about Marks method

sorry about my lax terminology, but I thought it was pretty clear from what had gone before

I think we are talking different thing here David

[David O'Neil]

Steve is ignoring the caveat to that method that Mark indicated. That 'gotcha,' and the fact that messing around inside clipviews is sometimes hard to do, is why I call it convoluted. Steve is also saying that fills on objects are clipped to the original outline of the object, which is wrong. He is also implying that I would edit the shape in the manner he gave. I wouldn't--I'd simply create a new line, change it to a shape, and copy/paste the attributes from the original shape. That is why I acknowledged in post 29 that the bevel method is cool. But I still think the clipview method is convoluted. And notice that I used the word "as" when comparing it to my method.

[Soquili]

David there is no "right" or "wrong" way, only personal preferences. Which ever method is satisfactory to an individual.

You can use your method and Steve can use his.

No need for convoluted debate.

[David O'Neil]

Agreed, and that's why you haven't seen me say my way is the best.

[ss-kalm]

No, you didn't hear me say my way was the best either .......

[handrawn]

Steve is also saying that fills on objects are clipped to the original outline of the object, which is wrong.

what I said was they are masked fills - masked by the outline of the shape - as opposed to stroke to path - you are not reading that right sorry no mention of clipping in that respect

if you expand a shape the bits of the fill that were masked come into view - but the fill is Static - as opposed to stroke to path were it would move with the shape

Bill is right - strokes for folks