On January 3, 2011 06:27:29 am Rogier Wolff wrote: > On Sun, Jan 02, 2011 at 09:47:48PM -0500, Yuval Levy wrote: > > > #-hugin cpWeight s0 a0 w100 > > Hey, do you see a need for an active-weight-zero control point?
Not really, weight is relative. > Do you see a need for an inactive weight-not-zero control point? Yes - when I want to deactivate it without losing the weight information (as you do presently implicitly by commenting the line rather than deleting it). The active/not active toggles are like the visibility toggles in the fast preview. > Why do you thing weight is an integer? actually I did not, but I realize that my specs were ambiguous. Should have read w100.0 to remove that ambiguity. > What about setting the weight to "1" by default? though of it. the problem is that legacy projects will come with no s/a/w parameters assigned. setting all defaults to 0 makes sure that there are no unexpected behaviors when parsing old PTO files. But we can expect parsers to be written to specification, right? so, yes 1 makes it for a sensible default. Yuv
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
