I think we should draw a line to show the parenting in the Maya Node Editor, that would make transform vs object make more sense, something we're not doing.
For loops... actually Maya and XSI have similar in architecture, and XSI's scene graph is full of loops as well. Every operator, like the moveop, is an operator that reads and writes back to the same object, so it's a loop. I recall the kinestate to be particularly hairy. We've kept all that kitchen stuff hidden under the hood in XSI. It's just not showable: a trivial operator like the moveop has half a dozen connections, a hidden cluster, and it just gets more complicated from there. The maya dg is a lot more simple, but it still isn't designed be directly used, and the hypergraph/node editor are more debugging tools than authoring tools. Bifrost will be designed for authoring. On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 11:06 PM, Gerbrand Nel <[email protected]> wrote: > I think my main problem with the node editor is that some things that are > influencing each other, aren't connected in the node editor. Other things > are connected in a loop. > This makes no sense to us humans. > I was hoping the node editor would fill the gap left by the lack of a proper > operator stack, but it still blows my mind how destructive Maya's work flow > is. > For now the node editor is where I do my shading, and check to see if my > deformers are still linked when things don't seem to work right. > > OH here is a fun thing to try: put some animation on a sphere. Then graph > that in the editor, and add animation layers. My nose almost started > bleeding :)
