On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 1:04 PM, KDianne Stephens <[email protected]> wrote: > ... > Finding the hollow head/hook arrowhead a barrier in a recent diagramming > instance, I noticed the solid arrowhead would work perfectly to show the > direction of the mountain motion, > eliminating the hollow head/hook arrowhead problem. > > And thus continue to wonder, is the hollow head/hook arrowhead really showing > direction?
I interpreted the content of the article to mean, among a lot of other useful bits, that having two distinct types of arrowheads (in addition to having the mountain-fold-arrow show motion towards the back of the piece by "hooking around") also helps the reader distinguish between the two types of folds. Anything that clarifies potential ambiguities is good in instructions, so it seems a very reasonable bit of advice to me. Further, Lang states: "On the [mountain-fold] arrow, however, there is definite agreement (more so than with the valley fold). An arrow associated with a mountain fold has a single-sided hollow head (figures 9 and 10 show examples)." And one of the first premises in the article was: "The way things have been done in the past has a big thing going for it: it is known to work, and it is known to many. In origami diagramming, that means that unless there is pressing reason otherwise, we should use the standard notation..." So given that there is a large body of work out there where the one-sided hollow-headed arrowhead is associated with a mountain fold, and there are good reasons for distinguishing the arrow types as well as using the arrow's tail to represent the motion of the fold, then it seems to me one should really consider using it, or risk confusing your readers. If your drawing application cannot create one-sided, hollow arrowheads, then you can of course make do with whatever arrows you have - but they'll be a bit non-standard, and could thus be a bit confusing to someone looking for the regular notation. Anne
