Hi Paul, For what it's worth, I'm leaning more and more toward overlapping, both because of your arguments, stuff Curt's said, and just tossing the ideas around...so this is a bit of a devil's advocate argument...
Paul Surgeon wrote: > Where are you thinking of saving the clipped data? > Back into apt.dat (heaven forbid!) or straight to a scenery format? Yes - back into the apt.dat format. > If we had to store the clipped data to apt.dat file the file will become > massive and the editor tools would have to be very complex to handle the > data. In essense TaxiDraw would become a 3D modeler for airports. Yes. > Saving overlapping layouts is going to be a lot cleaner. I'd rather see the > clipping done at scenery build time or simulator run time much like the way > it's handled at the moment. I'm not sure I would say overlapping is 'cleaner'...it's definitely simpler from a data format and validation standpoint, simpler for an editor, but perhaps more complex for a viewer. Whether it's a truer representation I think depends on the intent of the author. In my original RFC I described the apt.dat format as a "distribution" format because the output of editors like Taxidraw goes into the database for distribution. But this isn't really tool, because we'd like to be able to put the layouts back into TaxiDraw (or another editor) and work on them more. Also apt.dat's roll as a high-level format shared between two sims implies it shouldn't be gunked up with distribution-level optimizatinos. So both these things have been moving me back toward overlapping and away from clipping. *cheers* ben -- Scenery Home Page: http://scenery.x-plane.com/ Scenery blog: http://xplanescenery.blogspot.com/ Plugin SDK: http://www.xsquawkbox.net/xpsdk/ Scenery mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Developer mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
