Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!adt.UUCP!madd
From: madd@adt.UUCP (jim frost)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: A developer's view of the X fill policy
Message-ID: <8901031435.AA27362@adt.uucp>
Date: 3 Jan 89 14:35:00 GMT
Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 16

>So now I'll get to second-level semantics.  Are you sure you don't care
>that this tracks the line-width, that you're only interested in essentially
>one-pixel wide borders? [...] Are you
>sure you don't want "inside" to mean "not including the pixels that would
>be drawn by the path outline using the current line-width"?  Or are you
>sure that you wouldn't also like the capability of having the "outline"
>start at the path and go "outwards", rather than being centered on the
>path?

Given that wide lines are centered on the path, I'd say "inside"
should be whatever's inside and doesn't lie on the wide path.  I
wouldn't make the line go outward (or inward) from the path because
complex polygons (your star, for example) would really be interesting
if you did this.

jim