On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 03:38:03PM -0700, we recorded a bogon-computron collision of the <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> flavor, containing: > On Wed, 16 May 2007, Tom Russo wrote: > > > Aren't multipoint objects already in the standard? > > Kind'a sort'a. I think Bob B. mentions the protocol in one of his > addendums. > > > > Or at rather, aren't > > the multipoint objects supported by more than just Xastir? > > Yes. For weather uses only at present, but no real reason why that > can't change.
They're only *used* for weather now, but the support doesn't require that, does it? > > Turning a cad object into the necessary string for multipoint objects > > and stuffing it into an object's data shouldn't be *that* hard. Just need > > someone with the time to do the coding (i.e. someone other than me). > > Then again, I am not sure if the multipoint protocol allows enough vertices > > with enough precision to do all that CAD objects can do. > > I think that's the main problem, sending enough vertice information > along with the rest of the attributes across to the remote station > in a manner such that the remote station has an exact copy of the > info. Since we're calculating area enclosed and such, it'd be nice > if the representation of the object at the remote end was identical > to the original and not just a look-alike. Make two objects at the centroid of the area: one with the attributes in the status text, the other with the multiline data in the status text. Wouldn't require a spec change, and would display on any client that parses multiline objects. -- Tom Russo KM5VY SAR502 DM64ux http://www.swcp.com/~russo/ Tijeras, NM QRPL#1592 K2#398 SOC#236 AHTB#1 http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?DDTNM "And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit!" --- The Tick _______________________________________________ Xastir mailing list Xastir@xastir.org http://lists.xastir.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xastir