Hi,
> Is there a plan to switch to OSG? Just wondering. I didn't know.
I do not know of concrete plans, but here and then there are roumors.
I for my own would apprecheate that, since it looks very promising.
... also a few weeks ago a small cvs checkin with some 'flightgear' path in it
slipped into osg's cvs. So there must be people on it behind the scenes.
:)
> I think the current math utilities are self-documented adequately. One of
> my obstacles has been learning the definition of the multiplayer interface,
> so I know where to start. I think I am beginning to understand now.
>
> It appears the position is cartesian (ecef), but is the difference between
> the player location and the center of _his_ current tile. The position is
> in the fourth row of the 4x4, in the first three columns. The upper left
> 3x3 represents the orientation.
That depends a bit.
The scenery center is in current cvs now locateable at any position. This
fixes problems with roundoff and jumpy 3d objects near the eyepoint.
In fact it is allways near the current eyepoint.
> There has been much talk here about reworking the multiplayer model. I'm
> guessing that the assumption that the other players are all on the same
> tile will not be required in future versions. Are the current thoughts
> toward sending absolute position across the wire? Would that be geodetic
> or cartesian? (just gathering current thoughts, not definitive answers for
> where this is heading)
It looks like they will be cartesian.
And IMO this is the preferred way, even if people find lat/lon more intuitive,
cartesian coordinates are much more handy for nearly every kind of
computation required to be done in this area.
Greetings
Mathias
--
Mathias Fröhlich, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
