>> Bill, to you it *is* a transform tool because you are close to the code
>> and you know the way is it implemented. To the user it *is not* a
>> transform tool. It's just a tool off the palette like any other that is
>> called "Move" and that carries the hint "move layers, selections and other
>> objects".
>
>It's not even a transform tool from the code point of view. It has just
>been sorted into the Transform tools category since that seemed to
>describe it best.
>
>
>Sven
Well, I was quite aware that it is different from a code point
of view -- what I was trying to say is that it feels like a transform
tool from a *functional* point of view. Moving feels to me like it
should group logically with operations like Rotating and Flipping.
After all, isn't Rotating just a freer kind of Moving? This may just
be my math background coming through, but that's the way it feels
intuitively to me that it ought to be grouped.
-- Bill
______________ ______________ ______________ ______________
Sent via the CNPRC Email system at primate.ucdavis.edu
_______________________________________________
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
