-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello Jeremy,
Jeremy Moles wrote: > >> Nothing more was ever implied given the code provided, so I'm not sure >> why you even brought this up? The example is clearly a purposefully >> succinct and shortened summation. What "brings it up to speed" is adding >> the mixing, interpolation, etc, which I also mentioned at the end of the >> paragraph. Yes, I agree, however, who is going to do it? Those parts are the least "sexy" and most difficult in the animation code. My answer wasn't so much targeted at you (you know what this stuff is about, I believe), as much as at the others who could get a false impression that once we have a skeleton support and skinning code, all is going to work by magic. >> Secondly, and I'm not speaking as a total foreigner here since I do have >> a lot of experience w/ Cal3D and a decent amount of affiliation with the >> project, "when he can use osgCal or Replicant that work already" is >> really the issue that is up for debate in my mind. My issue is more on the resource level - is there anybody willing to commit himself to redo this stuff that Cal3D provides? The animation parts are tricky, requiring good math skills and certain experience. I didn't see anybody stepping up and saying "I will do this" until now. Unless we have this, it would be rather unwise to make a half-cooked toolkit that is not practically usable. >> Vladimir has made many posts regarding his changes to osgCal2 today, and >> from the information I can gather he was required to basically >> re-implement portions of Cal3D in his plugin just to get acceptable >> performance and support for hardware skinning. It sounds like osgCal2 is >> really more of a hybrid Cal3D adaptation than just a simple Cal3D >> wrapper/plugin. While his changes my create the outward appearance of >> animation "working already", as a developer it certainly doesn't qualify >> as such to me, though I often admittedly fall victim to putting too much >> emphasis on the wrong things. I think that this was answered elsewhere by him already. > >> Perhaps Cal3D just isn't the tool for the job here. Or at least, it >> shouldn't (and perhaps I'm wrong for believing will become as much) be >> THE character animation solution for OSG, long term. I agree with this, however, there isn't anything better on the table at the moment. Unless somebody offers to replace Cal, I suggest an evolution rather than revolution. I gather that this is also what Robert wants, judging from one of his last emails on the topic. If we can eliminate the dependency on Cal long term, great. However, I would hesitate to remove it until we have a replacement, including the design pipeline. >> At any rate, unless I'm willing to step up and code to solve the >> problem, I probably shouldn't say too much more on the issue. Unless I'm >> able to provide real working code, it just looks like I'm forum >> trolling, which I'm not trying to do. :) :-)) Regards, Jan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mandriva - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHYFzon11XseNj94gRAhPvAJ0YI+GqRuOuHwqxvLNaPR3lbwLQxACg1cd7 z/QGWZKaZ5KLoCTd+E5B4ac= =Yeu4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
