> From: Melchior FRANZ
> 
> * Jim Wilson -- Friday 10 June 2005 14:34:
> > For points in space it doesn't make any more sense to default 
> > them to zero than anything else.
> 
> You miss the point. The patch is not about initializing anything. I just
> added that to make clear that this will be zero if it's uninitialized. Or
> does reading a number from an unset property *not* return zero? Now it's
> visible in the code, too.
> 
> 
> 
> > nice to be able to throw an error when something is not correct or
> > reasonable in the XML.
> 
> would indeed be nice.
> 
> 
> 
> > It doesn't seem reasonable to specify more than zero but less than
> > 3 coordinates for either the center tag or the axis end point tags,
> > because these points in space. Even if a value IS zero, it is
> > unnecessarily ambiguous.
> 
> We know that you love verbosity from previous discussions about the
> material animation.  :-}

I think you meant to say "clarity", not "verbosity" ;-).  The question is, how 
does the parser tell the difference between intentional and erroneous 
omissions?  We don't have to help the modellers out but it might be a good idea 
where the omission is likely erroneous :-)
 
> 
> 
> > This is why I say this patch isn't any less broken than the current cvs.
> > In retrospect, it was probably a bad idea for me to use the existing axis
> > tag
> 
> This *is* less broken than what you delivered. Because now it doesn't depend
> on the x-component *alone* which way the animation goes. This was horribly
> inconsistent and unpredictable for those who don't read the source code.
> An even better solution would be nice of course.
> 

Oh alright, I'll give you it is maybe a 35% improvement level over current CVS 
:-).   Barring the possibility that someone wants to build in a standard way to 
specify rules,  maybe we should just log alert messages when the animation is 
misconfigured.

Best,

Jim



_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d

Reply via email to