On 6/30/07, Paul Martz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Your ramblings are pretty well spot on. Language
> ambiguities, OpenGL naming, OSG naming and behavior all
> conspiring to confuse :-)
I'm not so sure. The concept of having lighting on or off is pretty
well-established in the computer graphics industry. I don't recall a lot of
OpenGL newbies being confused about this concept.
When I was a GL newbie (quite some time ago now:-) I do recall
wondering about the the fact that things are not black when lighting
is off - if fact its often coloured brighter when lighting is off...
Once you know what is happening under the hood it's clear that when
lighting is off only glColor/Array have an effect of the primitive
colour, but first time you come to OpenGL this is one to scratch your
head on.
More likely, I'd say OSG users are confused because osgViewer and SceneView
"do something" with lighting, which makes them think that the ONLY way to
control lighting is through SceneView/osgViewer, rather than through the OSG
state model in their own scene graph.
If my suspicion is correct, then I'm not sure how to reduce the confusion
other than document it.
I think we can clear up the View API naming so its clearer what is
going on, get the API right and it'll be easier to use and easier to
document.
The idea that a viewer can control basic lighting is useful in itself,
its a bit like the viewer controlling the background colour etc, you
can do it at the viewer level or in the scene graph, depending on what
type of application you will depend what suits you best.
Robert.
_______________________________________________
osg-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://openscenegraph.net/mailman/listinfo/osg-users
http://www.openscenegraph.org/
