Yeah, that is wicked. However not quite what I meant - but close! Kind of like a soft, positional matcher? Flow with cps on seems to be the one, but it could be improved. (Goldilocks moment beckons)
MatchSrf does the better job of fitting to the curve.
Flow also does a bit more ‘kicking out’, even though the curves to flow from/toconverge very closely. Although, I could select fewer cvs to affect of course.
The convenience of MatchSrf and the EdgeMover is that you’re not fiddling with construction curves and stuff maybe stretching, as with the kick out above. More explicit, I guess I’d say.
How I would describe it, I guess, is that from the edge you select to match/move, all the points in the perpendicular direction get transformed the same way as the matched edge.
My comparison - match srf output
versus a sort of matchsrf / edgemover /hybrid.
Whatever transform is done to the matched edge, propogates perpendicular up the row of the cv (assume not refining match in this case, ive drawn three of the control polygons in white). Would be cool with G1 matching too - first two rows are moved to match a surface edge as normal, and then perpendicular point rows have the same transformation applied as the second (tangent matching) point. Then G2.