There was a question on another board about a chain so I started writing a reply that took so long that the original poster probably had no need for it any more so I just made it into a tutorial. I hope someone finds some part of it useful!

Oh, very nice! I'm looking forwards to seeing how you put on path.

For the last image in Part 1, at first glance, one might think that a slight touch of blurring might help. But I suspect you're holding off on the blur (filter) for the same reason as the member in the other topic. Although I haven't tested, I suspect that a filtered object can't be put on a path, as in PAP. So again, I'm looking forward to your solutions

I just don't like blurring! I think that it has its place - some shadows, some backgrounds, maybe skin sometimes , - mainly things that are not meant to be noticed. But fixing my bad design by using blur is not a habit I wish to foster.
Obviously my drawing needs work if it looks like it needs a blur! I hope to get better with practice.

Well, that would be my opinion about the blur, because I tend towards drawing things realistically. I don't think it's a bad design at all! I don't think using a little blur can hide a bad design. I've seen cases where people do use it to hide a bad design, but it's usually obvious. I'm not talking about the amount of blur in the Chrome filter. I mean just a very light touch.

But in the context in which you intend it, it might not be an issue at all. I don't have a very strong impression of your style, because you don't post your work here, except for the awesome tutorials, like this one, that you sometimes post.

Comparing the last image with the one just above it -- if the last image were shown at the size of the one above it, it probably would look a little more blended, just because of how human eyes work. Maybe that's a close up, just for instructions' or illustration's sake?

Well, I certainly didn't mean to discourage you. I do hope you'll continue, and post the Part 2

Well, here's part 2. Nothing of any Interest to skilled Inkscape users here, but it does show beginners how to apply the Pattern along path extension precisely...
There's one little 'bonus?' that you might notice that's not covered in the tutorial, that I was going to mention here, but I decided it would be a good way to check to see if anyone is even looking ... Edited to correct my imprecise use of 'offset' and 'spacing', and also corrected the formula so it gives you a negative number as it should. Better now. Sorry!

Oh, now see, the links look much better at that size!

I see a couple of details that may be unnecessary, but my confidence has been shaken so much lately, that I'm afraid to say

Very nice work druban

In spite of the great interest in this series, here's the third part. This one is more challenging and certainly not any more interesting than the previous ones. I perceive a trend!

And here's another part! you would think the subject would be exhausted but there's more! That poor horse!

Last one, I promise! Really! Thanks for the comments!

Somebody wrote:....

Wow, that's very impressive work druban! Even though there seems to be not much immediate interest, I predict this will be very useful for forum members and visitors alike, over some time, whether folks post their comments or not.

I do have a question though (even though I might not count as "Somebody"). In the part 4, where you add a tiny invisible subpath, to make each stacked path the same width and X value -- do I understand correctly that the subpath is not necessary if you use tangential offset? Would there be any particular situation or circumstances, where you couldn't use tangential offset, or that would require using the subpaths instead? Or it's just one of all the possible ways to do this?

brynn wrote: do I understand correctly that the subpath is not necessary if you use tangential offset? Would there be any particular situation or circumstances, where you couldn't use tangential offset, or that would require using the subpaths instead?

Hi Brynn, thanks for taking the time to read through all this stuff!
You're right, the little additional paths are there so you don't have to figure out a separate tangential offset for each path to get them to line up properly. If you're deft with the keyboard commands you could go paste, send to back, combine, paste, send to back, combine and you could graphically align 10 or 20 paths in a minute or so.
If you don't mind doing that bit of math (I hope I've explained it so it doesn't intimidate anyone) and spending the extra time - and that's only because this LPE won't accept a group, which could change anytime - then of course you're not cluttering your drawing up with anything.

Oooh right, these are 5 stacked up paths, so they each might use a different offset. At first I was thinking, what's so hard about finding the right offset value. But times 5, it makes sense that some might prefer to just add the extra subpaths.

Anyway, that's great work you've done

Great, you understand perfectly! If it's just one path you don't need an offset, if it's two paths only one of them needs an offset, etc.
Hope you can use it sometime.

Very well done tutorial, especially with all the tips put together. Many thanks, druban.