Subject:
|
Re: Voting Open for LCAD Parts Update 2000-01
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Wed, 19 Apr 2000 12:09:29 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1940 times
|
| |
|
|
Rui Martins <Rui.Martins@link.pt> writes:
> On Wed, 19 Apr 2000, Fredrik Glvckner wrote:
> > [...] then there is really no point in discussing anymore.
I meant to say "no point _for_me_ to discuss anymore". Sorry for
sounding harsh.
> All I say is that the benefits from it overweight the extra effort.
I still don't agree. But as I said (or rather meant to say, English
isn't my primary language, so I sometimes goof) we probably don't need
to discuss this anymore because we don't seem to share the same
premises. You seem to be very interested in keeping the rendering
time down, which is a clearly a good thing. I, on the other hand,
would rather take the view that with the evolution of hardware and
software, the issue of rendering time is pretty insignificant.
What is far more important, in my opinion, is the information inherent
in the LDraw language. By suggesting that superimposing a quad and a
disc should be replaced by as few polygons as possible, like you
appear to say, we would _lose_ information about the circular shape of
partial disc. In my opinion, losing this information is worse than
having to draw a few more polygons.
Following your suggestion would also make the LDraw format less
intuitive than it could have been. This would make the learning curve
steeper for LDraw novices, and I don't think that's a good idea. For
the future of LDraw to be bright, we need a large user base of people
who use the format.
So what I meant to say, which was probably not successful, was that we
should not discuss the number of polygons in the previous examples.
Rather, I think we should discuss what is important about the LDraw
format. Is it important to keep the number of polygons of parts to an
abosolute minimum, or is it important to keep as much information
about the "true" shape of the part as possible?
Fredrik
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Voting Open for LCAD Parts Update 2000-01
|
| (...) I only used eight, to simplify the drawing, which was made by hand. (...) All I say is that the benefits from it overweight the extra effort. (...) Correct, Can't argue with that ! But this problem surfaces, due to the intrinsic polygonized (...) (24 years ago, 19-Apr-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
73 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
