Alex makes some good points. So I'm wondering, why can't we have things like throttle/mixture, yoke, flaps, trim wheels, prop pitch, etc. not be part of the instrument panel (except in 2D panel mode)? I mean they really aren't instruments anyway. If we accepted that seperation, then what would we lose by going with Andy's suggestion?
Best, Jim Alex Perry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > I should point out that ... > > Many multihead capable video cards will only do 3D acceleration on the main > head. If the instrument panel is placed on the second head, it had better > use 2D GL calls. Therefore, the panel has to intrinsically be a 2D database. > > 2D objects require less textures because you don't have to stack them in > front of each other and cover up the joins. That frees up texture space > to do more interesting things in the scenery and in the panel itself. > > If you force panel designers to work in 3D, you will lose much casual work. > Fundamentally, most humans can work comfortably with 2D (and paper sketches), > but have trouble with 3D even when this is really only a flat structure. > Therefore, I recommend having a fully supported 2D panel file format. > > That doesn't mean that I object to having 3D panel content; we already > have the ability to do articulations and stuff in the PLIB infrastructure. > I just don't want this to be the only supported mechanism for panels. > _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
