I'm trying to build 3 MFDs that each have several pages --one has 7 or more ( the aircraft is still in development)
I'm not sure what the simplest organization is. Nested layers seems complex as there as 6 instruments plus text and lables on several pages. I was thinking I would organize each page as a panel. so I tried giving the different panels the same name and looked for an array in the property tree that I might work with --didn't find anything. Is there a way to turn panels on and off? maybe I could add a switch statement somewhere in the source code that reads a property? Steve -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mathias Fröhlich Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 10:16 AM To: FlightGear developers discussions Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] HUD: raw gl-commands vs. plib/osg wrappers Melchior, On Thursday 27 July 2006 09:58, Melchior FRANZ wrote: > * Mathias Fröhlich -- Wednesday 26 July 2006 22:49: > > Because it is not a limitation but rather a gain. A *well* *done* and > > *well* *supported* scenegraph will help you some much more than you > > probably can imagine now. > > You completely miss the point: we are using ssg! There was no > decision made to switch to osg. So, if we switch to ssg wrappers > first, we lose capabilities, that we may or may not get back later. > > I don't accept that and object. > > > In fact, a proper design - like a well done scenegraph provides > > You miss the point. We are using ssg! > > > So why should we limit ourselves in the long term with ssg? > > Fact is: we are using ssg. We may or may not switch to osg later. > There has *no* decision been made, so we can't rip out stuff now > that osg may provide later. The way to go is: > > - formal decision to switch to osg (or at least to start working on it) > - generate osg branch in cvs > - parallel development > > In the osg branch you can do with the HUD what you like. But not > in the current, *SSG* branch. I believe that you miss the point. The point is that we can, without loosing features, with a sensible design, prepare getting rid of ssg. As allmost allways, building sensible structures is a win even if no switch will happen. Just blocking that is not a good idea. ... did you ever look at the sceens of csp.sf.net? Greetings Mathias ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
