You can subscribe to this list here.
2004 
_{Jan}
(2) 
_{Feb}
(73) 
_{Mar}
(76) 
_{Apr}
(69) 
_{May}
(116) 
_{Jun}
(160) 
_{Jul}
(100) 
_{Aug}
(59) 
_{Sep}
(87) 
_{Oct}
(185) 
_{Nov}
(191) 
_{Dec}
(261) 

2005 
_{Jan}
(228) 
_{Feb}
(182) 
_{Mar}
(272) 
_{Apr}
(186) 
_{May}
(205) 
_{Jun}
(219) 
_{Jul}
(226) 
_{Aug}
(429) 
_{Sep}
(418) 
_{Oct}
(324) 
_{Nov}
(357) 
_{Dec}
(223) 
2006 
_{Jan}
(277) 
_{Feb}
(194) 
_{Mar}
(328) 
_{Apr}
(248) 
_{May}
(304) 
_{Jun}
(411) 
_{Jul}
(188) 
_{Aug}
(118) 
_{Sep}
(204) 
_{Oct}
(137) 
_{Nov}
(237) 
_{Dec}
(142) 
2007 
_{Jan}
(218) 
_{Feb}
(375) 
_{Mar}
(221) 
_{Apr}
(335) 
_{May}
(454) 
_{Jun}
(329) 
_{Jul}
(240) 
_{Aug}
(282) 
_{Sep}
(229) 
_{Oct}
(358) 
_{Nov}
(227) 
_{Dec}
(198) 
2008 
_{Jan}
(311) 
_{Feb}
(170) 
_{Mar}
(146) 
_{Apr}
(200) 
_{May}
(145) 
_{Jun}
(105) 
_{Jul}
(83) 
_{Aug}
(152) 
_{Sep}
(68) 
_{Oct}
(42) 
_{Nov}
(23) 
_{Dec}
(27) 
2009 
_{Jan}
(90) 
_{Feb}
(39) 
_{Mar}
(125) 
_{Apr}
(82) 
_{May}
(108) 
_{Jun}
(137) 
_{Jul}
(58) 
_{Aug}
(44) 
_{Sep}
(105) 
_{Oct}
(99) 
_{Nov}
(71) 
_{Dec}
(111) 
2010 
_{Jan}
(102) 
_{Feb}
(76) 
_{Mar}
(52) 
_{Apr}
(36) 
_{May}
(27) 
_{Jun}
(33) 
_{Jul}
(24) 
_{Aug}
(92) 
_{Sep}
(56) 
_{Oct}
(71) 
_{Nov}
(58) 
_{Dec}
(57) 
2011 
_{Jan}
(113) 
_{Feb}
(68) 
_{Mar}
(106) 
_{Apr}
(61) 
_{May}
(40) 
_{Jun}
(62) 
_{Jul}
(23) 
_{Aug}
(18) 
_{Sep}
(71) 
_{Oct}
(59) 
_{Nov}
(42) 
_{Dec}
(18) 
2012 
_{Jan}
(12) 
_{Feb}
(31) 
_{Mar}
(33) 
_{Apr}
(40) 
_{May}
(35) 
_{Jun}
(9) 
_{Jul}
(13) 
_{Aug}
(30) 
_{Sep}
(67) 
_{Oct}
(3) 
_{Nov}
(22) 
_{Dec}
(22) 
2013 
_{Jan}
(24) 
_{Feb}
(16) 
_{Mar}
(29) 
_{Apr}
(61) 
_{May}
(70) 
_{Jun}
(21) 
_{Jul}
(66) 
_{Aug}
(38) 
_{Sep}
(41) 
_{Oct}
(21) 
_{Nov}
(28) 
_{Dec}
(69) 
2014 
_{Jan}
(9) 
_{Feb}
(37) 
_{Mar}
(28) 
_{Apr}
(34) 
_{May}
(34) 
_{Jun}
(41) 
_{Jul}
(26) 
_{Aug}
(108) 
_{Sep}
(48) 
_{Oct}
(64) 
_{Nov}
(22) 
_{Dec}
(17) 
2015 
_{Jan}
(37) 
_{Feb}
(57) 
_{Mar}
(55) 
_{Apr}
(38) 
_{May}
(43) 
_{Jun}
(19) 
_{Jul}
(32) 
_{Aug}
(58) 
_{Sep}
(96) 
_{Oct}
(71) 
_{Nov}
(37) 
_{Dec}
(35) 
2016 
_{Jan}
(65) 
_{Feb}
(142) 
_{Mar}
(70) 
_{Apr}
(63) 
_{May}
(35) 
_{Jun}
(61) 
_{Jul}
(20) 
_{Aug}
(12) 
_{Sep}
(27) 
_{Oct}
(71) 
_{Nov}
(95) 
_{Dec}
(42) 
2017 
_{Jan}
(103) 
_{Feb}
(127) 
_{Mar}
(24) 
_{Apr}
(128) 
_{May}
(65) 
_{Jun}
(61) 
_{Jul}
(45) 
_{Aug}
(12) 
_{Sep}
(60) 
_{Oct}
(4) 
_{Nov}
(6) 
_{Dec}

S  M  T  W  T  F  S 





1

2

3

4

5
(2) 
6

7

8
(1) 
9
(9) 
10

11
(4) 
12
(2) 
13
(2) 
14

15
(6) 
16
(5) 
17
(7) 
18
(4) 
19

20
(4) 
21
(1) 
22
(2) 
23
(2) 
24
(4) 
25
(3) 
26
(4) 
27
(6) 
28
(1) 
29
(3) 
30
(14) 
31
(4) 
From: Alvin Penner <penner@va...>  20090130 22:57:15

> The two Bezier quadratics that you could extract from the Inkscape file > (assuming that the curve representing the function is a single Bezier > curve segment) I am not entirely clear on which way the data is flowing here. Are you trying to do a curvefit to an existing curve (not in Inkscape) and then subsequently represent it in svg, or are you drawing a curve in svg and then trying to represent it as f(x)? In any event, just quick comment. The typical svg path element is a cubic Bezier which can only be represented parametrically as a function of t, not as an explicit f(x) relationship. However, there is a subset that might be interesting to look at. If you take a cubic Bezier curve and force the 4 control points to be equally spaced in the x axis, then what happens is that x(t) becomes linear and y(t) remains cubic. So you now have an explicit function y(x) which is still SVGcompatible, and is a cubic polynomial. So you could do a standard curve fit using cubic polynomials, and still be able to represent the result in svg.  View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/erasertoolopinionstp21675675p21757247.html Sent from the Inkscape  User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. 
From: Philip Rhoades <phil@pr...>  20090130 19:56:11

David, Thanks for the note. Software exists that solves simultaneous quadratic equations  has anyone tried to interface stuff like that to info for a single segment in a .svg file?  I couldn't find anything . . Regards, Phil. David Gressett wrote: > The two Bezier quadratics that you could extract from the Inkscape file > (assuming that the curve representing the function is a single Bezier > curve segment) contain all the information that you need. You need to > look for "simultaneous quadratic equations". If your curve is in > multiple segments, each segment will have to be solved separately, and > each segment will have to be represented as a separate y=f(x) function. > > Philip Rhoades wrote: >> Rob, >> >> Thanks for note  I will check them out but I thought it should be >> possible to use the information in the .svg file  as long as the curve >> is a fn, then the formula should be able to be determined . . >> >> Regards, >> >> Phil. >> >> >> Rob Antonishen wrote: >> >>> I believe what you are looking for is either called "curve fitting" or >>> "regression analysis" software. >>> >>> You would just need to render the svg to a series of X/Y points and >>> run them through this type of software to get a best fit equation >>> (depending on the curve family chosen, of course) >>> >>> Rob A> >>> >> >>  Philip Rhoades GPO Box 3411 Sydney NSW 2001 Australia Email: phil@... 
From: David Gressett <jdgressett@am...>  20090130 19:35:19

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO88591" httpequiv="ContentType"> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> The two Bezier quadratics that you could extract from the Inkscape file (assuming that the curve representing the function is a single Bezier curve segment) contain all the information that you need. You need to look for "simultaneous quadratic equations". If your curve is in multiple segments, each segment will have to be solved separately, and each segment will have to be represented as a separate y=f(x) function.<br> <br> Philip Rhoades wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:498343C8.9010907@..." type="cite"> <pre wrap="">Rob, Thanks for note  I will check them out but I thought it should be possible to use the information in the .svg file  as long as the curve is a fn, then the formula should be able to be determined . . Regards, Phil. Rob Antonishen wrote: </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">I believe what you are looking for is either called "curve fitting" or "regression analysis" software. You would just need to render the svg to a series of X/Y points and run them through this type of software to get a best fit equation (depending on the curve family chosen, of course) Rob A> </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""><!> </pre> </blockquote> </body> </html> 
From: Philip Rhoades <phil@pr...>  20090130 18:15:46

Rob, Thanks for note  I will check them out but I thought it should be possible to use the information in the .svg file  as long as the curve is a fn, then the formula should be able to be determined . . Regards, Phil. Rob Antonishen wrote: > I believe what you are looking for is either called "curve fitting" or > "regression analysis" software. > > You would just need to render the svg to a series of X/Y points and > run them through this type of software to get a best fit equation > (depending on the curve family chosen, of course) > > Rob A>  Philip Rhoades GPO Box 3411 Sydney NSW 2001 Australia Email: phil@... 
From: Rob Antonishen <rob.antonishen@gm...>  20090130 14:23:50

I believe what you are looking for is either called "curve fitting" or "regression analysis" software. You would just need to render the svg to a series of X/Y points and run them through this type of software to get a best fit equation (depending on the curve family chosen, of course) Rob A> 
From: heathenx <heathenx@gm...>  20090130 13:33:16

john cliff wrote the following on 1/29/2009 6:45 PM: > I actually quite like the concept of having it as a tool (I'm not a > big fan of modifiers when using my tablet), but currently the option > in the callig tool is much more useful to me as it has all the > fixation etc options that I need to actually make it useable. The > eraser is stuck on a slanted fixed angle that makes it a lot less > useful than it could be. would be nice if using the eraser on the > wacom in the callig tool did the alt mode, if that was the case i > think i'd be fine without the seperate tool... I sometimes wish the eraser tool was a round shape (circle) instead of a calligraphy shape, similar to Gimp's round brush. That always made sense to me but then again I haven't ever read why the eraser tool is the way that it is. Perhaps it's done that way for a reason. heathenx 
From: Joshua Facemyer <jfacemyer@gm...>  20090130 13:28:01

Is it possible for the eraser tool to just link to the calligraphy tool in Alt reverse mode? I think it makes sense to have an icon (it's more user friendly, really), but not to duplicate code (or do a less useful job with different code). If it is possible, could it then use and store different parameters so, in essence, it acts like its own tool but operates exactly the same as the calligraphy tool (with alt reversed)? JF bulia byak wrote: > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 6:45 PM, john cliff <john.cliff@...> wrote: > >> I actually quite like the concept of having it as a tool (I'm not a >> big fan of modifiers when using my tablet), but currently the option >> in the callig tool is much more useful to me as it has all the >> fixation etc options that I need to actually make it useable. The >> eraser is stuck on a slanted fixed angle that makes it a lot less >> useful than it could be. >> > > Exactly. To make it truly useful as a subtractor, we would need to > duplicate most of the Calligraphic tool. Which would be bad from both > the UI perspective and the coding perspective. > > >> would be nice if using the eraser on the >> wacom in the callig tool did the alt mode, if that was the case i >> think i'd be fine without the seperate tool... >> > > Absolutely. Would it work for everyone if turning the pen over would > switch you to Calligraphic tool with Alt reversed, i.e. erasing > without Alt and drawing with Alt? > > 
From: Philip Rhoades <phil@pr...>  20090130 13:26:29

Felipe, That was just an example  I think the family of curves are more likely to look like the attached  it would be nice if there was some automatic equation extraction method . . Thanks, Phil. Felipe Sanches wrote: > well... that curve looks like half of a gaussian curve. And people > usually model things using gaussian ditributions in statistics. > > On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 10:26 AM, Philip Rhoades <phil@...> wrote: >> Felipe, >> >> I have a statistical relationship in mind and I find it is convenient to >> use Inkscape to create the graphs of what I think it should look like >> under different conditions. Having done that, it would be nice to be >> able to extract the formula for each curve that I have drawn. The curve >> of the relationship that I am thinking of should have only a single y >> value for each x coordinate, so it should be a function. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Phil. >> >> >> > From: Felipe Sanches <felipe.sanches@...>  20090130 02:02 >> > well.. maybe. >> >> > it is a bezier curve. It is a parametric curve whose coordinates are >> > defined by quadractic equations: >> >> > x(t) = a*t² + b*t + c >> > y(t) = d*t² + e*t + f >> >> > finding the values of a,b,c,d,e and f involves looking at the >> > coordinates of the control points of that curve and doing a bit of >> > math >> >> > Not all bezier curves can be described as 1 parameter functions, >> > though... I think that it is indeed possible to do that with the one >> > you provided since it appears to have a single y value for each x >> > coordinate, thus it satisfy the requirements to be called a function. >> >> > what are you trying to do with this math stuff? >> >> >> > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 10:14 PM, Philip Rhoades <phil@...> wrote: >> > > People, >> > >> > > Is there a way of extracting the formula for the curve from the >> attached svg >> > > ie in something resembling a conventional y = f(x) format? >> > >> > > Thanks, >> > >> > > Phil. >> >  >> > Philip Rhoades >> > >> > GPO Box 3411 >> > Sydney NSW 2001 >> > Australia >> > Email: phil@... >>  >> Philip Rhoades >> >> GPO Box 3411 >> Sydney NSW 2001 >> Australia >> Email: phil@... >> >>  >> This SF.net email is sponsored by: >> SourcForge Community >> SourceForge wants to tell your story. >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfspreadtheword >> _______________________________________________ >> Inkscapeuser mailing list >> Inkscapeuser@... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscapeuser >>  Philip Rhoades GPO Box 3411 Sydney NSW 2001 Australia Email: phil@... 
From: Felipe Sanches <felipe.sanches@gm...>  20090130 12:35:06

well... that curve looks like half of a gaussian curve. And people usually model things using gaussian ditributions in statistics. On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 10:26 AM, Philip Rhoades <phil@...> wrote: > Felipe, > > I have a statistical relationship in mind and I find it is convenient to > use Inkscape to create the graphs of what I think it should look like > under different conditions. Having done that, it would be nice to be > able to extract the formula for each curve that I have drawn. The curve > of the relationship that I am thinking of should have only a single y > value for each x coordinate, so it should be a function. > > Thanks, > > Phil. > > > > From: Felipe Sanches <felipe.sanches@...>  20090130 02:02 > > well.. maybe. > > > it is a bezier curve. It is a parametric curve whose coordinates are > > defined by quadractic equations: > > > x(t) = a*t² + b*t + c > > y(t) = d*t² + e*t + f > > > finding the values of a,b,c,d,e and f involves looking at the > > coordinates of the control points of that curve and doing a bit of > > math > > > Not all bezier curves can be described as 1 parameter functions, > > though... I think that it is indeed possible to do that with the one > > you provided since it appears to have a single y value for each x > > coordinate, thus it satisfy the requirements to be called a function. > > > what are you trying to do with this math stuff? > > > > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 10:14 PM, Philip Rhoades <phil@...> wrote: > > > People, > > > > > Is there a way of extracting the formula for the curve from the > attached svg > > > ie in something resembling a conventional y = f(x) format? > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Phil. > >  > > Philip Rhoades > > > > GPO Box 3411 > > Sydney NSW 2001 > > Australia > > Email: phil@... >  > Philip Rhoades > > GPO Box 3411 > Sydney NSW 2001 > Australia > Email: phil@... > >  > This SF.net email is sponsored by: > SourcForge Community > SourceForge wants to tell your story. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfspreadtheword > _______________________________________________ > Inkscapeuser mailing list > Inkscapeuser@... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscapeuser > 
From: Philip Rhoades <phil@pr...>  20090130 12:27:02

Felipe, I have a statistical relationship in mind and I find it is convenient to use Inkscape to create the graphs of what I think it should look like under different conditions. Having done that, it would be nice to be able to extract the formula for each curve that I have drawn. The curve of the relationship that I am thinking of should have only a single y value for each x coordinate, so it should be a function. Thanks, Phil. > From: Felipe Sanches <felipe.sanches@...>  20090130 02:02 > well.. maybe. > it is a bezier curve. It is a parametric curve whose coordinates are > defined by quadractic equations: > x(t) = a*t² + b*t + c > y(t) = d*t² + e*t + f > finding the values of a,b,c,d,e and f involves looking at the > coordinates of the control points of that curve and doing a bit of > math > Not all bezier curves can be described as 1 parameter functions, > though... I think that it is indeed possible to do that with the one > you provided since it appears to have a single y value for each x > coordinate, thus it satisfy the requirements to be called a function. > what are you trying to do with this math stuff? > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 10:14 PM, Philip Rhoades <phil@...> wrote: > > People, > > > Is there a way of extracting the formula for the curve from the attached svg > > ie in something resembling a conventional y = f(x) format? > > > Thanks, > > > Phil. >  > Philip Rhoades > > GPO Box 3411 > Sydney NSW 2001 > Australia > Email: phil@...  Philip Rhoades GPO Box 3411 Sydney NSW 2001 Australia Email: phil@... 
From: Diederik van Lierop <mail@di...>  20090130 08:37:50

> Original Message > From: Philip Rhoades [mailto:phil@...] > Sent: 2009 jan 30 1:15 > To: Inkscape User Community > Subject: [Inkscapeuser] Extracting formulas from curves? > > People, > > Is there a way of extracting the formula for the curve from the attached svg > ie in something resembling a conventional y = f(x) format? No, at least not from Inkscape as far as I know. If any, you'd get x(t) and y(t) with t in the range of [0,1]. If you need more details then lookup Bezier curves on Wikipedia or leave a message on the 2geom mailing list. Regards, Diederik 
From: bulia byak <buliabyak@gm...>  20090130 02:02:57

On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 6:45 PM, john cliff <john.cliff@...> wrote: > I actually quite like the concept of having it as a tool (I'm not a > big fan of modifiers when using my tablet), but currently the option > in the callig tool is much more useful to me as it has all the > fixation etc options that I need to actually make it useable. The > eraser is stuck on a slanted fixed angle that makes it a lot less > useful than it could be. Exactly. To make it truly useful as a subtractor, we would need to duplicate most of the Calligraphic tool. Which would be bad from both the UI perspective and the coding perspective. > would be nice if using the eraser on the > wacom in the callig tool did the alt mode, if that was the case i > think i'd be fine without the seperate tool... Absolutely. Would it work for everyone if turning the pen over would switch you to Calligraphic tool with Alt reversed, i.e. erasing without Alt and drawing with Alt?  bulia byak Inkscape. Draw Freely. http://www.inkscape.org 
From: Felipe Sanches <felipe.sanches@gm...>  20090130 02:02:29

well.. maybe. it is a bezier curve. It is a parametric curve whose coordinates are defined by quadractic equations: x(t) = a*t² + b*t + c y(t) = d*t² + e*t + f finding the values of a,b,c,d,e and f involves looking at the coordinates of the control points of that curve and doing a bit of math Not all bezier curves can be described as 1 parameter functions, though... I think that it is indeed possible to do that with the one you provided since it appears to have a single y value for each x coordinate, thus it satisfy the requirements to be called a function. what are you trying to do with this math stuff? On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 10:14 PM, Philip Rhoades <phil@...> wrote: > People, > > Is there a way of extracting the formula for the curve from the attached svg > ie in something resembling a conventional y = f(x) format? > > Thanks, > > Phil. >  > Philip Rhoades > > GPO Box 3411 > Sydney NSW 2001 > Australia > Email: phil@... > >  > This SF.net email is sponsored by: > SourcForge Community > SourceForge wants to tell your story. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfspreadtheword > _______________________________________________ > Inkscapeuser mailing list > Inkscapeuser@... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscapeuser > > 
From: Philip Rhoades <phil@pr...>  20090130 00:14:43

People, Is there a way of extracting the formula for the curve from the attached svg ie in something resembling a conventional y = f(x) format? Thanks, Phil.  Philip Rhoades GPO Box 3411 Sydney NSW 2001 Australia Email: phil@... 