Am 18.09.2010 16:16, schrieb Vo Minh Thu:
Ok. I'll learn more about Collada then. Is your code already available
somewhere?
I will upload it in a few days on hackage. It is not finished yet.
Still, Collada seems to be on a far end of the spectrum of what could
be unified. I mean, say your animation has to be rendered by some
Haskell code, do you wish to go through Collada or that your animation
code and the rendering code share some other data structures than
Collada (Or maybe Collada is just a first step?) ? If the later, it
would be useful to share what those other data structures should be.
Animations in Collada are streams of interpolated floats that are
interpreted
as time or output (i.e. angle of a rotation). The output is then
channeled to the tags of the nodes.
One can do quite a lot with this. At the moment I can't image what else
one could do.
When I said I thought about solidifying things lately, I was thinking
to the problem you describe but at a lower level: for instance there
are many different representations for 3D vectors and transforms. Is
it also a concern for you?
This is a problem. But I would accept a majority vote. At the moment I would
use the same vector library as gpipe.
Why a majority vote? Maybe we can do better: state some desired
properties, benchmark the existing libraries and see if something
fits?
Are there other people interested in unifying the efforts here?
Cheers,
Thu
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
