I agree that Collada is not the best runtime format. However, other than FBX, 
it's still the best translation format to get content in to a 3d engine in a 
reliable and feature-rich fashion.

The format is ZIP compressed, and a possible 7z  compression variation would 
perform better. Transfer of the compressed format isn't too much of a concern.

- j


On Mar 16, 2011, at 8:33 AM, Fabrice3D wrote:

>  I would really appreciate if Away3D team will not ruin Collada.
> 
> Just don't worry, the format breaks often enough on its own. We'll try our 
> best to make a parser following the latest specs 1.4.
> Unless its for dev purposes, you should avoid use this format for runtime. 
> The more meshes definition will increase, the less this format will
> be a suitable solution for web or mobile (if it ever was ).
> 
>> It would cost a lot to convert all the models because I don't do it myself. 
> Prefab --> free
> drop/load model, export --> easy & free
> 
> Fabrice
> 
> On Mar 16, 2011, at 2:41 AM, Taro App wrote:
> 
>> pcarret, if you really need a Collada loader for Broomstick now, you
>> could use ASCollada. ASCollada's parser code is independent of 3D
>> engine. You just need a class to map ASCollada classes to Broomstick
>> classes. I already wrote such a class that works, so I could share it
>> if you need it. It only supports geometries and materials, and doesn't
>> support animations, though, because it's just a hack and I don't need
>> them. (ASCollada itself supports animations.)
>> 
>> For new projects, I'd choose formats other than Collada, but I already
>> have many Collada models for my application with longevity, developed
>> with PaperVision3D. It would cost a lot to convert all the models
>> because I don't do it myself. I'm planning to port my application to
>> Broomstick, so I would really appreciate if Away3D team will not ruin
>> Collada. Please! m(_ _)m
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 3:58 AM, Dave <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> It definitely is.  IMO, Collada is more for quick prototyping and not
>>> "final pipelines".  I don't necessarily care if the implementation is
>>> fast.  As long as its got good coverage.  Any chance that you can get
>>> ascollada duct-taped on the side of away3d, like papervision had it?
>>> 
>>> On Mar 15, 11:45 am, pcarret <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Collada is very very hard to implement. For sure.
> 

Reply via email to