| |
On Fri, 30 Jul 1999 07:04:52 GMT, "Adam Howard" <abhoward10@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> I disagree. There are a number of pieces (just about all) that need to be
> rotated one way or another to achieve the look you want. The design of xxxx
> just takes into account the rotational axis as an aid in positioning the
> part (using the a key). If it is a major pain for you to position this part
> each time you want to use it you can always orient it how you want it lined
> up with the arch frame 30044 and save them as a dat file to use when you
> want too.
>
> I'm not trying to be argumentative on this subject. When I authored the
> part I was just following standard rules (rotating parts should be designed
> around their rotational axes to make use of the a key regardless of how it
> positions the part when it loads into ledit).
Hmm. That's not *exactly* the intended guideline. Rotatable parts should
be positioned so the axis of rotation lies on one of the major axes. That
way, the part can be easily rotated to any angle.
> Now that I think about this issue a little more, I know that I can orient
> the part to fit with the window frame, but it would still be offset from the
> frame because one of the axes (x?) would still be through the rotational
> axis of the part. However, when you press the a key the part would not
> rotate around its rotational axis and you would need to rotate it using
> ledit's turn function. I just can't see the benefit. Either way you would
> still have to move the part to line up with the window frame, it's just that
> one way allows you to use the a key in the standard tradition and the other
> doesn't.
But the A key function is only useful if you happen to want to rotate the
window by 90 degrees. And the usefulness of the A key is offset by the
need to always (ok, not 'always', but in 99.9%+ of the cases) re-rotate the
window into the 'correct' orientation.
> Thank you for you comments:)
> I still think I should leave it the way it is though.
Thought experiment: there are three users (or the same person needs to do
three different things with the window). Person A wants to rotate the
window exactly 90 degrees. Person B wants to rotate the window, but at
some angle other than 90. And person C just wants to put the window in the
frame, so the plastic customers in his Italian restaurant don't get a
chill.
In the part's current position, how many steps does each of these people go
through to put the part in the frame?
Person A hits the A key one (or three) times, then rotates 90 on X, and
rotates 90 on Y, then repositions on Y.
Person B rotates on Y to their desired angle, then rotates 90 on X, and
rotates 90 on Y, then repositions on Y.
Person C rotates 90 on X, and rotates 90 on Y, then repositions on Y.
What if the part was changed to the other extreme, so it fits in the window
frame by default?
Persons A and B go through similar operations: reposition the window on Y,
so the axis of rotation lies on the X axis. Then they rotate on X to open
the window, and reposition on Y (the other direction this time).
Person C does nothing, because the part is already where she needs it.
Finally, what if the part is oriented upright, with the axis of rotation
lying on the X-axis?
Person A and B both rotate the window around X, and relocate on Y.
Person C relocates on Y.
So, which positioning approach results in the least amount of difficulty
for users overall?
Steve
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
31 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
