Akkana Peck wrote:
> Martin Nordholts writes:
>> It seems as if quite a lot of people would like there to be a way of
>> fixing the size of a pending rectangle.
>>
>> If we handled the default values of Fixed: Size the same way as for the
>> default values of the Fixed: Aspect ratio entry (i.e. w
Martin Nordholts writes:
> It seems as if quite a lot of people would like there to be a way of
> fixing the size of a pending rectangle.
>
> If we handled the default values of Fixed: Size the same way as for the
> default values of the Fixed: Aspect ratio entry (i.e. when rubber
> banding has
> suddenly I am in Kansas, on a very cool project for 2 weeks.
I hope you had a good vacation :)
>> How about having 100x100 as default when there is no pending
>> rectangle and rectangle width x rectangle height when there is one?
>> This would be the case for both the selection tools and th
On Thu, 2007-08-23 at 20:44 -0500, peter sikking wrote:
> > How about having 100x100 as default when there is no pending
> > rectangle and rectangle width x rectangle height when there is one?
> > This would be the case for both the selection tools and the crop tool.
>
> we cannot base the def
hey Enselic,
> (It was an odd time stamp on your mail. are you back from vacation
> yet?)
suddenly I am in Kansas, on a very cool project for 2 weeks.
> The spec asks for ideas for good default values for the Fixed: Size
> entries.
yeah, the 100x100 is arbitrary.
> How about having 100x100
peter sikking wrote:
> Guys,
>
Hello guiguru,
(It was an odd time stamp on your mail. are you back from vacation yet?)
The spec asks for ideas for good default values for the Fixed: Size entries.
How about having 100x100 as default when there is no pending rectangle
and rectangle width x rect
