[WF-Protocols] first attempt with xml schema

[Andor Holtsmark]

In modelling the word vertex is always used to describe points in space
which are used to build faces/polygons.

I'd avoid using nodes, as node is an ambiguous term

munin


----- Original Message -----
From: "Matze Braun" <matze at braunis.de>
To: <protocols at worldforge.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 11:18 PM
Subject: Re: [WF-Protocols] first attempt with xml schema


>
>
> On Mon, 7 Jul 2003, 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".
> So if a vertex is a position then we should call it position :-) Or we
> stay with vertex as this seems to most commonly used word here...
>
> >
> > <node id="X">
> >   <vertex/>
> >   <texcoords1/>
> >   <texcoords2/>
> >   <tangents/>
> >   <foobar/>
> > </node>
> I don't see the need for wrapping these structure into an extra section.
> We'll never have 2 of these sections, so why should we make the format
> more complicate and add that section?
> Apart from that the name "node" isn't good IMO. It's such a general word
> like "thing", "element", "widget". We should better use meaningful
> specific terms here.
>
> Greetings,
> Matze
>
> _______________________________________________
> Protocols mailing list
> Protocols at mail.worldforge.org
> http://mail.worldforge.org/lists/listinfo/protocols
>