Hi all, I guess that type section for lines only sets a concrete line width, and may be sets it not to be clipped, but it would be all. Rigth? I wonder wether these nice section lines I have seen, wich have an arrowhead are made ex profeso (type arrow, -clip off or so) or are pre-built. Regards, Roman
I guess that type section for lines only sets a concrete line width, and may be sets it not to be clipped, but it would be all. Rigth?
If the line has control points (it's an arc not a segment) it is drawn in a special way where the middle part (which crosses the passage) is omitted (thbook footnote 15). Optionally you may specify direction arrows using direction option.
I wonder wether these nice section lines I have seen, wich have an arrowhead are made ex profeso (type arrow, -clip off or so) or are pre-built.
-direction begin, see above Martin
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:17:13 +0100 (CET) "Martin Budaj" <m.b@speleo.sk> wrote:
If the line has control points (it's an arc not a segment) it is drawn in a special way where the middle part (which crosses the passage) is omitted(thbook footnote 15). Optionally you may specify direction arrows using direction option.
OK, now I get the arrow, but there are problems: section line is missing from first point to second: only begin of line and entire arrow is shown, or sometimes, part of perpendicular line is visible, but then it's on the passage. I think I'm missing something, but I can't figure what it is. a) cross-section is in its own scrap b) on "plan" scrap I insert a point section with option -scrap scrap99 c) I draw a line section (curve) from aprox. where the bottom of cross-section will be to desired point with option -direction end d) what I get is on attachment I guess there is a good reason to do it with a curve instead of a segment, but it's a pity, because the segment is much more handier. Regards, Roman
Roman Muñoz wrote:
OK, now I get the arrow, but there are problems: section line is missing from first point to second: only begin of line and entire arrow is shown, or sometimes, part of perpendicular line is visible, but then it's on the passage. I think I'm missing something, but I can't figure what it is.
You have probably misplaced the control points -- they determine how long segments will be drawn. See the attached picture which displays their correct position.
I guess there is a good reason to do it with a curve instead of a segment, but it's a pity, because the segment is much more handier.
You may draw a segment either, but you get solid line crossing the passage. Drawing a curve makes it possible to control the omitted part in the middle. Even if you draw a curve, displayed will be straight segments, not a curve. Regards, Martin
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 14:41:24 +0100 (CET) "Martin Budaj" <m.b@speleo.sk> wrote:
You have probably misplaced the control points -- they determine how long segments will be drawn. See the attached picture which displays their correct position.
Ah cojones. I was unable to understand footnote. Now I see how to do. Thank you very much.
You may draw a segment either, but you get solid line crossing the passage. Drawing a curve makes it possible to control the omitted part in the middle. Even if you draw a curve, displayed will be straight segments, not a curve.
Yes, I have seen both. I guess the curve is needed in order to do the "clipping" because the segment has not control points. Ingenious. Regards, Roman
participants (2)
-
Martin Budaj -
Roman Muñoz