Subject:
|
Re: BFC revisited
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Fri, 17 Aug 2001 02:55:22 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1373 times
|
| |
|
|
I forgot to mention: if anyone is interested in looking at the most-recent
version of the BFC proposal, it's still at:
<http://www.geocities.com/partsref/bfcspecv4.txt>. The first screen of text
is meta-comments about the status of the proposal. The actual proposal
starts at the line "LDraw Language Extension for Clipping".
Steve
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss writes:
> There was never agreement on what the BFC standard should be. So there
> aren't very many parts that follow it in any way.
>
> I do have a set of primitives that are BFC-compliant. I didn't straighten
> out all the primitives, but I did a number of them. I can email them to
> you, if you want.
>
> Steve
>
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Gary Williams writes:
> > I'm looking for a model file that utilizes BFC-certified parts to test
> > backface culling in the CAD application I'm developing.
> >
> > Unfortunately, as near as I can tell, only 13 part files have a BFC-related
> > comment, and on top of that, they're not consistently formatted:
> >
> > 30134 (0 BFC CERTIFY CW)
> > 30156 (0 BFC NOCERTIFY)
> > 30183 (0 BFC CERTIFY CW)
> > 4107073 (0 CERTIFY BFC CW)
> > 4107488 (0 CERTIFY BFC CW)
> > 4107539 (0 CERTIFY BFC CW)
> > 4150p01 (0 BFC CERTIFY CW)
> > 4523 (0 BFC NOCERTIFY)
> > 553 (0 BFC CERTIFY CW)
> > 73593 (0 CERTIFY BFC CW)
> > 9044 (0 CERTIFY BFC CW)
> > 9567 (0 CERTIFY BFC CW)
> > 553s01 (0 BFC CERTIFY CW)
> >
> > I had hoped that by now, at least the basic bricks would be BFC compliant,
> > since they are used more often than any other parts.
> >
> > It would be neat if we could develop a standard set of DAT files for testing
> > Lego renderers. These would be akin to the famous teapot model that was
> > used for the first general-purpose renderer.
> >
> > -Gary
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: BFC revisited
|
| I have printed the bfcspec file for review. Hopefully I will get a response back to you. I have been using BFC in most all my new parts for the last six months or so. Please send me the BFC compliant primitives, so that I can be sure I am using them (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: BFC revisited
|
| There was never agreement on what the BFC standard should be. So there aren't very many parts that follow it in any way. I do have a set of primitives that are BFC-compliant. I didn't straighten out all the primitives, but I did a number of them. I (...) (25 years ago, 17-Aug-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
8 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
|
|
|
|
