[WF-Protocols] first attempt with xml schema

[res]

On 07.07.2003 22:55, Aglanor wrote:

> On Mon, 2003-07-07 at 22:34, Aglanor wrote:
> 
> 
>>Well, from the dictionary: (www.dictionary.com)
> 
> 
> [...]
> 
> 	And apart from stating the obvious :) perhaps you could say the vertex
> is the position and wrap all the data associated to a vertex in an upper
> entity, say "node".
> 
> <node id="X">
>   <vertex/>
>   <texcoords1/>
>   <texcoords2/>
>   <tangents/>
>   <foobar/>
> </node>
> 
> 	Of course this is all nomenclature, so any would do. Matter of tastes.

Yes. <imho>On the one hand, "node" sounds rather general, and I 
assiociate it with trees and graphs, on the other hand a model is just 
that, a graph :) However, "Point" may be synonymous to vertex, but it 
has a stronger association with 3d graphics. "Point" is rather 
specifically a point in space, while "vertex" has a more common touch. 
So it makes sense to name the coordinate in space "point" and the 
entirety of data "vertex". However, an argument against this is that 
"vertex" is indeed commonly used synonymously for what I call 
"point".</imho>
Anyway, for the sake of consistency, there should be an "official" 
nomenclature. Otherwise, the eventually resulting spec could be a bit 
confusing :)

-f.r.