Comment 3 for bug 171631

Originator: NO

Blur mapping: thanks for creating the sample, but I'm really not convinced
that the polynomial scale is really better than the default. I think it's
mostly a matter of taste. Anyway, why don't you post to inkscape-devel to
seek other opinions.

1-pixel increments are noticeable, indeed. But my point for 0.1% to be
equal to 1 pixel, your object must be viewed at 2000x2000 pixels. Which is
bigger than most screens. So it will be _only_ noticeable on zoom-in, and
therefore my reasoning applies.

Here's a compromise: when the bbox of the object is larger than the
visible area of the canvas, clip it to that visible area for the purposes
of determining the blur percentage. This way you will be able to blur it as
finely as possible by zooming in, without changing anything else. This will
have one disadvantage however: blur % will change when you zoom into a
blurred object closely. Moreover, if you set a large blur in zoom-out and
then zoom in to adjust it, it may be that the new percentage with the
clipped bbox will be larger than 100% and therefore not displayed properly.
So I don't really think it's a good idea, forget it :)

Making the slider and the spinbutton obey different rules is also a bad
idea imho. If I set spinbutton to 50% and the slider is not in the middle,
something's broken.

Pasting style components separately: perhaps a submenu (blur, opacity,
fill, stroke) is not such a bad idea after all. I'll think about it and
probably implement it for 0.46.