[Bf-funboard] Remove doubles, sorry Kent

[Luke Wenke]

> 'Remove doubles' is easy english and as a foreigner I find it much easier
to
> accept than merge (merge what? which vert with which one?) or weld (one
> second, I just get the dictionary) hm, very graphical.

That button only merges/welds *selected* vertices - that is a common theme -
that buttons act on selected things. And when you're in edit mode, the only
selectable things are vertices.
It doesn't remove all the doubles that exist across the whole mesh if not
all of the vertices are selected. And it in fact removes triples, or
quadruples, etc, if those vertices are within the threshold.

> I think it just describes what it does
As I just explained, it doesn't explain what it does... it only removes
doubles if the doubles are selected, and if they're within the threshold,
and if there are only pairs of vertices within the threshold rather than
triplets of vertices, or dozens in each threshold, etc.

> (all three solutions are not selfexplanatory).
Well "Remove doubles"/merge only works in edit mode, and only works (gives a
result above 0) when vertices are selected - and some are closer together
than the threshold distance. The tooltip for "Rem Doubles" is "Remove
Doubles". If it was "Merge", the tooltip could be "Merge the selected
vertices together that are the specified distance apart".
If all three are not self-explanatory, then one or more are probably more
self-explanatory than another... BTW, in p48 of the Blender 2.0 manual, to
describe how "Rem Doubles" works they talk about welding vertices
together... (they use the word "weld" twice) So it would seem that weld is a
bit more explanatory than "remove doubles". Though "remove doubles" seems
simpler, it doesn't actually accurately describe what the button does, as
stated earlier.

> And it's really not the longest button text.
"Rem Doubles" comes close as one of the longest button texts I think... and
it is an abbreviation. Merge (and weld) are full words.

> Same goes for OSA (the tooltip says antialiasing and one can expect from
the
> newbie to at least read tooltips)
But what's the point of calling it OSA? Why not AA?

> Such problems are no problems if the blender documentation is good enough.
But it takes time to read the documentation and remember what each
pseudo-logical name (e.g. remove doubles) does.

> And actually having worked with such more or less unique namings for 3
years
> now, they add quite to Blender's appearance or maybe even Blender's
Character.
It means that people would be able to switch between 3D programs easier,
blender to other programs and vice-versa... and in reviews, Blender would be
a little less criticized for being hard to use.... I don't see why Blender's
unique names must be clinged to if they are unnecessarily hard to understand
for beginners. The GUI changes would change Blender's appearance and
character much more anyway.

> Again I say, explain before the question arises (recommended official tuts
> [download a bit obtruded in a friendly nonoffensive way]) and such namings
> do not present a problem.

So you're saying that the old names (such as "StField", etc) should stay the
same in Blender forever more since there are tutorials out there (scattered
across the internet) that explain what the things in Blender mean....

> And yes, I will sacrifice myself to do them if there's interest in such a
thing.
I'm not sure what you mean.... but anyway, there have been a few people so
far that like the button names to be clear.
- Luke.