do you have another email adress? for some obscur reason each time I try to contact you i'm redirected to [email protected] (without the dots), the person who receive the email is very gentle but I don't like bothering her like that :s mine is [email protected]
On 18 jan, 03:17, Li <[email protected]> wrote: > About the help, contact me [email protected] and we can discuss it. I > really could use some help! > > > > On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 12:00 AM, Li <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks G, fixed. > > > On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 11:49 PM, G. <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> I'm always up to give a hand, but as long as I'm helpul, so if I can, > >> it will be with pleasure :) > > >> seems that there is a problem with the calculateOrientationXY method > >> when the character is a space :s > > >> On 18 jan, 02:15, Li <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > Sure! > > >> > Let me know if you want to participate in the core of the development. > > >> > On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 11:10 PM, G. <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > I see... and that's also why there were some angles where the extrude > >> > > materials become transparents I guess... > >> > > anyway don't forget to keep me aware of the evolutions > > >> > > On 18 jan, 00:02, Li <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > > Well, all this makes sense. But... > > >> > > > As I said before, we need to experiment with shape primitives a bit > >> more > >> > > > before deciding which is the best way to incorporate them in the > >> > > framework. > >> > > > A shape primitive is different from a face primitive in that it can > >> have > >> > > > much more than 3 vertices, besides from containing different ways to > >> > > > concatenate them. Given that the engine is designed to work with > >> > > tri-faces, > >> > > > this makes shape primitives come into conflict at particular > >> situations. > >> > > > With this, I'm reconsidering a complete re-structuring of the branch > >> > > right > >> > > > now. Perhaps an extension of the core face element that supports > >> curved > >> > > > sides, I dont know... There is a lot to experiment before advancing, > >> but > >> > > the > >> > > > inflection point is close. An implementation like that would indeed > >> be > >> > > very > >> > > > powerful. > > >> > > > On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 6:37 PM, G. <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > > > Well, > > >> > > > > I started using 3D with Five3D, and I spent some times on the > >> > > > > different classes. I think Mathieu Badimon's philosophy on his > >> > > > > framework is actually the best and that it would have to be the > >> > > > > starting point of the developement of the branch, as you did. > > >> > > > > concerning the options, I think that the best solution would be to > >> mix > >> > > > > the two : from one point keeping the Away3D chain and > >> create/redesign > >> > > > > classes so the branch would be the closest possible to the > >> > > > > ActionScript API. > > >> > > > > Basically, and in regard to my experiments, and from a user's > >> point of > >> > > > > view, I would see something like this: > > >> > > > > - making the actual Shape3D class become a Graphics3D class, I > >> mean > >> > > > > giving it the same functionalities as the Graphics class. > >> > > > > - making a Shape3D class which would basically be a wrapper for > >> vector > >> > > > > shapes, with x, y and z coordinates (and maybe rotationX, > >> rotationY, > >> > > > > rotationZ, though it's not really important for a start unlike x, > >> y > >> > > > > and z coordinates) > >> > > > > - making a Sprite3D class a part of the actual chain, but with the > >> > > > > ability to add Shapes and other Sprites as children, and maybe > >> have > >> > > > > something like the actual Sprite class in the API: a graphics > >> getter/ > >> > > > > setter (and Sprite being a mesh and not only a container would be > >> the > >> > > > > best) > > >> > > > > with that i think that the branch would have a solid basis and the > >> > > > > maximum flexibility. I've seen during my experiments with the > >> > > > > TextField3D primitive that designing the text letter by letter > >> first > >> > > > > opens to more possibilities (such as spotting an expression, or > >> > > > > changing some words' font, isolating some words/expressions and > >> being > >> > > > > able to act on it as a group, like changing its z property or make > >> > > > > some rotations) and is also faster with less code (and drawing the > >> > > > > text content word by word is even faster but it reduces the > >> > > > > possibilities). > > >> > > > > what are you thinking about it? > > >> > > > > Peace > >> > > > > G > > >> > > > > On 17 jan, 19:52, Li <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > > > > G, > > >> > > > > > When I started designing the textfields branch, I tried to > >> reproduce > >> > > the > >> > > > > > Shape, Sprite, etc chain in the Actionscript API, but in 3D. Of > >> > > course, I > >> > > > > > started by making it functional as simple as possible with the > >> idea > >> > > of > >> > > > > > extending it in the future so that it behaves just as that chain > >> > > does. I > >> > > > > was > >> > > > > > inspired to do this by Mathieu Badimon's Five3D engine. It > >> functions > >> > > just > >> > > > > as > >> > > > > > the AS3 graphics chain... simple and beautiful =) > > >> > > > > > So currently we have a few things designed that sort of work > >> that > >> > > way, > >> > > > > but > >> > > > > > not exactly. A lot of functionality is missing in regard of > >> this > >> > > chain > >> > > > > such > >> > > > > > as the ability of Sprite3D's to contain other Sprite3D's, etc. > >> But > >> > > before > >> > > > > > actually extending the branch to support these missing features, > >> we > >> > > are > >> > > > > > currently re-evaluating the core of the shape primitive in the > >> > > branch: > >> > > > > We're > >> > > > > > currently thinking about 2 options: > > >> > > > > > 1) Extend the branch by making more classes so that the graphics > >> > > chain is > >> > > > > > reproduced more precisely or > > >> > > > > > 2) Remove this chain and make the shape primitive be inherent in > >> > > other > >> > > > > > Away3D classes. Away3D already has a chain for this with classes > >> like > >> > > > > > Object3D, ObjectContainer3D, etc so it could be redundant to > >> design a > >> > > > > whole > >> > > > > > new chain for elements that are based on shape primitives > >> instead of > >> > > face > >> > > > > > primitives... > > >> > > > > > As you see, the branch is currently near the end of it's first > >> > > > > experimental > >> > > > > > stage. It is a good point to reframe it entirely and think about > >> how > >> > > it > >> > > > > will > >> > > > > > oficially merge with the main branch. There are however more > >> > > expriments > >> > > > > to > >> > > > > > do... We are just begginning to understand the shape primitive, > >> so a > >> > > > > little > >> > > > > > more experimentation before the official framework is built > >> wouldn't > >> > > be > >> > > > > bad. > > >> > > > > > So, the points you make are very good G, and all this will have > >> to be > >> > > > > > considered upon deciding the future of the branch... What are > >> your > >> > > > > thought > >> > > > > > about all this? > > >> > > > > > Cheers, > >> > > > > > Li > > >> > > > > > On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 4:19 PM, G. <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > > > > > Hey, > > >> > > > > > > I was wondering if there was a way to make Sprite3D able to > >> add > >> > > other > >> > > > > > > Sprite3D as children (in additon to the ability to add > >> Shapes3D)? > >> > > I've > >> > > > > > > seen on a parent class that there is an addElement() method, > >> but > >> > > it's > >> > > > > > > no more reachable at Sprite3D's level > > >> > > > > > > Second thought: maybe it would be interesting that Shape3D > >> would > >> > > have > >> > > > > > > x,y and z coordinates (it would permit for example to build > >> words > >> > > from > >> > > > > > > single chars by only doing some addChild instead of redrawing > >> > > > > > > everything) > > >> > > > > > > On 16 jan, 22:12, Li <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > > > > > > yeaaaah > >> > > > > > > > ;D thanks > > >> > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 4:11 PM, G. <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > > hey there, > > >> > > > > > > > > that's pretty neat what you're doing with the shading > >> material. > >> > > > > > > > > and yep the textfield branch is going to be really cool ;) > > >> > > > > > > > > peace > > >> > > > > > > > > On 15 jan, 21:40, Li <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > > > > > > > > Cool G! > > >> > > > > > > > > > I'm busy at the time developing more graphics stuff > >> related > >> > > to > >> > > > > > > primitive > >> > > > > > > > > > shape rendering, like shading materials, backface > >> culling, > >> > > fixing > >> > > > > > > sorting > >> > > > > > > > > > bugs, etc: > >> > >http://www.lidev.com.ar/demos/textfieldsmaterials18/ > > >> > > > > > > > > > I trust you will develop cool stuff on your end. So yey! > >> > > Double > >> > > > > > > > > development > >> > > > > > > > > > speed for the textfields branch! > > >> > > > > > > > > > cheers > > >> > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 3:47 PM, G. <[email protected]> > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > > > > ok then, > > >> > > > > > > > > > > meanwhile I will continue my developements as I will > >> use > >> > > these > >> > > > > > > classes > >> > > > > > > > > > > for my actual project, so I might add some new > >> features etc > >> > > but > >> > > > > > > I'll > >> > > > > > > > > > > keep you in touch when the time comes. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > bests > >> > > > > > > > > > > G > > >> > > > > > > > > > > On 15 jan, 12:26, Li <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Cool, I'll take a look as soon as I can! > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks!! > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 8:58 PM, G. < > >> [email protected]> > >> > > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > I uploaded a rar in the files section called > >> > > > > TextElementSrc.rar > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > keep me in touch and bon courage ;) > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > cheers > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > G > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > On 14 jan, 14:18, "G." <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ok i prepare something for today > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > cheers > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 14 jan, 14:04, Li <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > > ... > > plus de détails »
