[WF-Protocols] first attempt with xml schema

[Anders Stenberg]

res wrote:

> On 06.07.2003 21:09, Matze Braun wrote:
>
>> -How should we reference to the textureunits? currently you can give 
>> a integer
>>   number like this:
>>   <texturecoords textureunit="1"/>
>
>
> IMHO "texture units" sound too hardware-centric. Maybe "texture 
> coordinate set" is a better name. Also, identifiers for set should be 
> arbitrary names:
>     <texturecoords set="diffuse_map" />
>     <texturecoords set="fancy_effect" />
> etc.
>
> - f.r.
>
I guess I agree here. I'd like to see some kind of general entry too. 
Like <customcomponent name="tangent"><c x="0" y="1" z="3.4">.... I think 
otherwise it'd be a bit constrained, and people will probably start 
storing custom data (like tangents, binormals, special color 
assignments, material blend factors, whatever) in places where it's not 
supposed to be, just to get it in there somehow. (For example use some 
texturecoordinate set that isn't used, or something.) Do I make sense here?

Also, I'm a bit split about naming the positions "vertices", like from 
Matze's example:

    <vertices>
      <v x="-1" y="-1" z="-1"/>
      <v x="1" y="-1" z="-1"/>
      <v x="-1" y="1" z="-1"/>
      <!-- More vertices come here. -->
    </vertices>

I see "vertex" as the whole collection of position, normal, texture coordinate, etc. For me "position" or something would be a bit more appropriate. Maybe that's just me. It's not a really important issue to me, just an opinion. :)

/Anders Stenberg