Jim Wilson wrote:

Modelers could perhaps build at the "aircraft specific" versions, so
that they are there, and the program would default to ignoring these. Users
who wanted the alternate versions could then deliberately enable them.


Best,

Jim


_______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel


What if there were an intermediate layer, call it functions. Each key in a key configuration is bound to a function, say key 's' -> function 'aero-braking'. Then a plane config could simply say I need function 'aero-braking' defined and so on. Then the user just picks a key config that has all the appropriate functions, (or even one that doesn't, but this should generate a warning so our user can fix his key config). When the user what's to activate his speedbrake, or drogue chute or whatever aero-braking system that their plane has, they just press 's' or whatever they have defined. Loads a different plane, different plane author, different, but similar, braking system maybe, but the function name stays the same across planes, and the actual key that Joe user presses stays the same.


The only caveat is that we would have to make sure everyone is using the same function names, but that's a lot easier than doing it with keys, since keys are finite but there are an endless number of potential function names. If we start with a broad enough list of functions to bind keys to, people should be able to work within the system without having to add a new function too often. When they do, the user just has to edit his key config and add a key for that function.

Josh, still convinced that aircraft shouldn't be able to define the interface.

_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Reply via email to