Subject:
|
Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Thu, 27 Oct 2005 10:27:55 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2739 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Tore Eriksson wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Kevin L. Clague wrote:
> > Nowhere in the MPD specification is hieriarchy communicated, except for the
> > minor case of what the top level model name is.
>
> That's correct, but irrelevant. The hieriarchy is communicated with one single
> MPD in a way that would be impossible using one single DAT/LDR - if you put it
> together correctly, of course.
Could you please expalin why this is so? I guess I just don't get it.
>
>
> > I also don't see why you couldn't use groups to rename part or parts.
>
> I have never used LPub so I'm not familiar with groups.
Groups are an invention in MLCad.
>
>
> > I just don't think it is the best solution. I see a possible solution that
> > could help animation, *and* building instructions: named part instances. Can
> > you see my point?
>
> I'm not sure. But if I understand the discussion and terminology correctly, LDA
> gives every object an unique object name you ask for. The problem with using
> MPD:s is that, for example the objects LeftHand and RightHand are both called
> "983.dat" in an MPD. No unique names. Now, to solve that poblem and to make it
> *much* easier for programs like LDA if there was a tag that LDA recognizes as
> LeftHand, RightHand etc, so when LDA gets there, it creates its
> Minifig01.LeftHand object and inlines that file*) and so on. This tag I'm
> talking about is not part of the MPD spec, but would be required as part of a
> definition MPD in the LDA object library.
> *) Sub-file of a specific minifig definition MPD.
Ah, we are talking the same thing. "983.dat" is no good. Yes, the tags give
you metion give you a unique name (within the scope of the MPD). And the tag is
generic and can be reused across MPDs, giving you a teplatized form for minifig.
>
> MPD:s seem good for defining a model's hieriarchy when building a model library
> and to find a solution to the problems James presented. But when it comes to
> animation scripting, we need another soultion.
I still don't understand the first part, but I agree with the second.
>
> /Tore
>
> >
> > Kev
Kev
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
| (...) Oh, I... don't use MLCad ether... :) (...) Yes, Templates is a word I was looking for! :) (...) Lunch break is too short to give an example of how I mean. I will try to explain later this evening/night (CET) /Tore (19 years ago, 27-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Thoughts on File Format for LDraw Animation
|
| (...) That's correct, but irrelevant. The hieriarchy is communicated with one single MPD in a way that would be impossible using one single DAT/LDR - if you put it together correctly, of course. (...) I have never used LPub so I'm not familiar with (...) (19 years ago, 27-Oct-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
30 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
