Re: A Simple Proposal (Arrrrgh, I hate my mailer program)

Robert A Schmitt (rgi@world.std.com)
Mon, 27 Nov 1995 22:26:23 -0500 (EST)


Sorry about the previous post.

>
> I said
> >> > I'd be interested in hearing other people's ideas on this?
> Bernie responded
> >> So would I.
> Gavin said
> >I'll jump in:
>
> Actually Gavin, I was looking for some opinions from people other than the
> these of us :-)

Ok.

> >Should we be able to cesate a prototype that wraps up a Texture2 node with a
> >script (that generated the Texture2's 'image' field somehow, based on some
> >parameters) so that we can ship over the code to generate a texture on the
> >fly instsad of shipping the pixels?
> >

Yes, yes, yes. I finally get control of rendering. VRML Shading Language
(VSL) here I come!

:
:

>
> Right - but this transform can get very hard to figure out in the case
> where, for example, you have multiple properties inside a seperator. Where
> do you send this change message to?
>

So how about this:

Adding iterators. There are two types: object iterators and scene iterators.
An object iterator controls the order of processing within one of Bernie's style-
conscious objects. The default is order specified in the file and would not
be necessary to define in the file allowing current scenes to work. Other object
iterators may hit only transforms in all nodes for example. Object iterators
can be placed either outside or inside a BernieObject.

A scene iterator can only appear outside a BernieObject. Scene iterators give the
browser the processing order of nodes in the scene. Example: OpaqueTransparent
iterator (process all Opaque objects first, then all Transparent objects). Instsad
of editing the scene graph, we just iterate over it differently for different
affects. Default is current scene traversal.

Comments?

Bob
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert A. Schmitt RESolution Graphics Inc.
Information Visualization Consulting rgi@world.std.com


  • Next message: Mitra: "Re: late draft of the 1.0 Clarifications"
  • Previous message: Robert A Schmitt: "Re: A Simple Proposal"