Hi Jeremy, On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 9:01 PM, Jeremy Moles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Personally I would not recommend stick a HUD into a scene graph any > > more, as conceptually it's harder to claim that a HUD is part of the > > scene, however, there are some cases where you might actually want a > > This raises an interesting question, Robert. osgWidget can easily use > Viewer or CompositeViewer (it really just needs an osgViewer::View* for > computeIntersections()), but throughout the examples and whatnot I > normally just use a standard Viewer. Should I begin encouraging use of > CompositeViewer instead, just as a kind of "good development practice" > thing?
I'd suggest having examples which are Viewer, CompositeViewer and done entirely in the scene graph, as users will probably want to mix and match. The less restrictions you apply to the NodeKit the better it'll be. Once OSG-2.4 is out we can get osgWidget integrated into the core OSG and make sure all of the above work seamlessly. > I'm currently implementing DotOsgWrapper proxy objects for all of > osgWidget. I'm not pretending this will act as a fully-serialized "state > dump" of an interface at any given time, but it will at least allow you > to dump some semblance of your UI and view it in text form--or even load > it in a perspective view to see how Windows and whatnot are layered... Good to hear that you are putting the .osg together. It's really useful from a variety of standpoints. Robert. _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
