Indeed, forward compatibility of the 2012 application, backward compatibility of the 2013 scene files. Let's leave it at that. Quoting Wikipedia is never a good thing.
On 16 April 2012 23:07, Grahame Fuller <[email protected]> wrote: > 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... > >
