Added :inverse detailed section

[TDW89]

I think I have done this right. Let me know if I have set this up wrong.
Documentation for issue #652

[Dunbaratu]

Is this true? I was unsure. (remembering of course, that if it says, say, 330 that does mean -30 - I think Rots get printed clamped into the 0-360 range so you never see negative numbers when you print them (i.e. -10 prints as +350).)

but I don't remember if this is really true - has this claim been tested?
(One of the reasons I find it takes a while to do the docs is I often run into stuff I'm not confident about and have to fire up KSP to type it out and give it a try.)

[TDW89]

I didn't test whether Rots ever get printed as negative but i did test it accepting those rotations. Have just done more testing on them and using vang there is a 0.5deg (might be floating point error - might not) between r(30,15,5):inverse:vector and r(-30,-15,5):vector. There is also a similar difference between them and r(330,345,355):vector.
Also print r(30,15,5):inverse. gives R(329.756,345.538,2.968) the first 2 are close enough that i just assumed floating point but the 2.968 makes me uncertain.

[Dunbaratu]

The best test to be sure is to print them from a ship in orbit, time warp about 1/4 of the way around the planet, and try again. That will ensure whether or not the axes rotating will mess up the result or not.

[TDW89]

just warped round kerbin running this script:

Until false {
 set dir1 to vecdrawargs(v(0,0,0),r(30,15,5):inverse:vector,red,"Dir1",5,true).
 set dir2 to vecdrawargs(v(0,0,0),r(-30,-15,-5):vector,green,"Dir2",5,true).
}.

Both arrows stayed over lapping the whole way round.

Edit:
ok looking at this http://uk.mathworks.com/help/aerotbx/ug/quatinv.html
inverse of a quaternion is a bit more complex. so I guess the example isn't exactly correct (even if it appears to be) but the bit about opposite rotation is from here http://docs.unity3d.com/ScriptReference/Quaternion.Inverse.html. Do you want me to remove the example part and re-submit the PR?

[Dunbaratu]

I think lacking an example is better than having an example but it being a misleading one. I'd say remove it.