In placing a new node using relative positioning, what is the behavior of the dot operator when referring to an existing named node? For example, if xc is an existing named node, what does the following mean?
\path (xc.71) +(1,0) node (xd) {$x_4$};
Here's a short example (with such an occurrence) that draws a simple directed chain:
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usetikzlibrary{shapes,arrows}
\begin{document}
\begin{tikzpicture}[auto,scale=1.0,%
block/.style = {draw,circle,very thick,minimum size=0.5cm},%
directed/.style ={draw,-triangle 45, shorten >= 0pt, very thick}]
\pgfmathsetmacro{\strch}{1.2}
\path (0*\strch,0) node[block] (xa) {$x_1$}
(1*\strch,0) node[block] (xb) {$x_2$}
(2*\strch,0) node[block] (xc) {$x_3$};
\path (xa) [directed] -- (xb);
\path (xb) [directed] -- (xc);
\path (xc.71) +(\strch,0) node (threedots) {$\ldots$};
\path (threedots) +(\strch,0) node[block] (xn) {$x_n$};
\path (xc) [directed] -- (threedots);
\path (threedots) [directed] -- (xn);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}
Changing the node reference to (xc.11) or (xc.999) or (xc.0), of course, yields different results, but it isn't clear to me after scouring the PGF manual what exactly the bit after the decimal means.
(FWIW, this question arose out of erroneously referring to a node x3 using a macro that stored the value of 3.0 instead of 3, hence x3.0. I've since fixed that bug, but I'm now just generally curious about this behavior.)
Thanks in advance!

(a.b)meansbanchor of shapeaifbis found in the anchor list and point on the border of shapeawith anglebwith respect to center ofaifbis a number. – percusse Aug 07 '12 at 18:14@crowded definition and make a little more explanatory answer when I have the chance instead of the terrible English comment :) – percusse Aug 07 '12 at 18:57