Damien wrote:
I advise you *not* to remove the ability to use parallelogram zoom > boxes. Not only does it allow each axis to be rotated independently, but it also allows each axis to be stretched independently. There are some fractal types which desperately need these features in order to bring the details into view, and if I recall correctly, Jim Muth's explorations sometimes venture into this territory.
The convincing part of that argument is that Jim (or other fractal artists) use skewed zoom boxes. I didn't mean to be suggesting that Rich take skewing out (though I guess I should be careful expressing my opinions lest they be interpreted as policy) - just to say that *for me* I never saw the value of skewing zoom boxes. The complication is not mathematical (see my other message that should exhaust that subject) but it's more in the GUI implementation of the zoom box. But that's certainly not insuperable. My more serious suggestion at this point is let's not take out any features without a lot of discussion. My earlier less serious comment about howling fractal aratists was really saying the same thing - we shouldn't ignore howling fractal artists :-) Tim