I mean "forward-compatibility of the 2012 application". From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Grahame Fuller Sent: Monday, April 16, 2012 06:04 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: 2013 save scene = no load in 2012?
No, but forward-compatibility of the 2013 application is what would allow it to open 2013 scenes. Forward-compatibility is really something that needs to be designed and coded into the software, so it makes sense to use it to describe the software not the data. gray From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Chris Marshall Sent: Monday, April 16, 2012 05:55 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: 2013 save scene = no load in 2012? Though I accept the argument, my 2013 scene is still not backwardly compatible with the 2012 application. There are certainly two ways of looking at it, as my 2013 scene is never going to be forwardly incompatible with the 2012 application, or is it? ;-) On 16 April 2012 22:46, Grahame Fuller <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: It's the software version that can be said to be forward or backward-compatible, not the scene files. So v2012 would be forward-compatible if it was designed to be able to open scenes from versions that don't exist yet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_compatible gray From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Chris Marshall Sent: Monday, April 16, 2012 05:31 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: 2013 save scene = no load in 2012? Weird. 20 years of working in cgi I've never heard it that way around. A scene from 2013, won't open in 2012 because it's not backwardly compatible. Surely that's right? Isn't it? Whatever On 16 April 2012 21:47, Luc-Eric Rousseau <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: Peter agg has the correct definition. Forward comp is loading newer data in older builds On Apr 16, 2012 11:06 AM, "Chris Marshall" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: No, it's the other way around. On Saturday, 14 April 2012, Peter Agg wrote: <pendent> Isn't forwards compatibility what we're after in this case? Backwards compatibility = being able to open older whatevers in the latest Forwards compatibility = being able to open latest whatevers in an older </pendent> On 14 April 2012 15:37, Ed Schiffer <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I really thought Softimage had backwards compatibility before going Autodesk...
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
