 | | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) I prefer the currently used 0x prefix, but I guess if you picked # to match other file formats in use by ldraw users then I can live with it. I forget, does POV or HTML use # for the hex prefix? (...) No spaces in the name? Alpha-numeric only? (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) HTML uses # (...) The name should be the characters after the !COLOR keyword and before the next keyword. The only contraint I can think of is that is not be one of the other keywords. (...) ALPHA should apply to the VALUE color and the color (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) I won't make any guarantees, but there's a reasonably high probability that I won't even try to support the above, even if it's what the spec says in the end. It's too much of a pain. Additionally, it disallows further expansion of the colour (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) How about NAME? (...) I don't see a problem with this. Steve or Jacob? -Orion (21 years ago, 23-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) Disregard the NAME suggestion. I'm brain dead today. -Orion (21 years ago, 23-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) I don't think so. What if CODE is part of the color name? I can't think of a quick example for that, but other key words are easy. AlphaTeamRed, BlueChrome... I'll support color names with no space characters, and I'll consider supporting (...) (21 years ago, 23-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) But what if Lego prints an opaque dithered pattern on a transparent brick? I think the ALPHA is more versatile if only applied to the VALUE color. You can still get an alpha dither color by using a color code for d which points to a color with (...) (21 years ago, 23-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) [snippety] (...) [doo-dah] (...) I was thinking no space. So far, we've avoided wrapping literals in quotes in LDraw (with only occasional trouble). I'd like to keep avoiding quotes. [snippety-ay] (...) Good question. We hadn't thought about (...) (21 years ago, 23-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) I would prefer that spaces not be allowed in the color name as well. However, the spec does say that all the keywords are case sensitive (must be all caps), and I believe the original suggestion was that keywords by themselves with spaces (...) (21 years ago, 23-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) I've been keeping clear on the dither issue so far, because I didn't have a strong opinion one way or another. However, the more I think about it, the more I think we're not seeing the forest through the trees. Because of this, I vote we (...) (21 years ago, 23-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) I realize many current ldraw rendering programs use a stipple pattern to render transparent surfaces. I do it in ldglite because I'm too lazy to do the sorting required to use alpha blending. However, I don't really want the specs to dictate (...) (21 years ago, 23-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) I could go for that. Simpler is better! Of course that means the METALLIC (or PEARLY) tag needs an argument to define the color of the embedded bits. If you want it to be the same color as the substrate, just use the same color code. Don (21 years ago, 23-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) OK, I'm alright with that. (...) If that's a needed parameter, I'd rather have it follow the METALLIC keyword. (...) I'm ok with that, too. Is '50%' really an adequate description? There can be many brush patterns... Steve (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) Actually, I've most recently used dithering to simulate chrome/metal/metallic parts. Steve (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) Actually, the spec says just the opposite, that tags (keywords) are not case-sensitive: (...) That seems reasonable. Steve (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) I don't want to specify that some parameters are order-specific, and others aren't. I'd rather they are all one way or the other. Goes back to easier 'correct' parsing. However, I'm sure the entries in ldconfig.ldr will always have their tags (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) Well, I don't think that qualifies as an argument for its inclusion in the new !COLOUR statement, since those are already covered by the more precise pre-defined materials. --Travis Cobbs (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) Whoops. Silly me. It's amazing the tricks memory can play on you ;-). (...) While this is still probably do-able, I think my original argument about the possible creation of future tags still holds (unless you're also agreeing to the enforced (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: [LSC] Colour Definition meta-statement
|
|
(...) I'm not sure you're right there. I think Steve may have been trying to achieve a specific dithered look, different from the effect created by the pre-defined metal code in say ldview or ldglite, probably to better differentiate some static (...) (21 years ago, 6-Feb-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
