Talk:Proposals/Unified Mesh Format

Jump to navigation Jump to search

I realize this is far beyond my expertise, but is there a reason that we're not looking to implement an existing, widely used and widely supported format? Are we talking here about creating our own format? Does that mean maintaining our own tools, import/export plugins, etc? Or am I missing something? --H-hour 02:37, 30 November 2012 (SAST)

In fact, this is about the internal representation of mesh data, not the storage (file) format (which I think Sandro would also like to unify, but that's a different matter).
--DarkRain 03:57, 30 November 2012 (SAST)

Naming: TextureCoordinate is way too long, […] What is better?

As far as I know, the compiled code has no names of variables. When you write the code you can use autocompleting and other tips, so readability and clearing of code is better than economy of symbols.

  • Sure, but they take space in the editor window. So, I prefer to keep balance between being concise and being easy to understand. Sandro 23:13, 1 December 2012 (SAST)


What about this? this was my approach (from egl afair) to unify the rendering - as we earlier used the raw model formats to render everything. --Mattn 16:05, 30 November 2012 (SAST)

Multiple objections:

  • It is not a pure mesh format, it encapsulates animation data (bones), texture data (skins), animation morphing data (next_*), and even the filesystem data. Why keep all that together?
  • No support for lightmaps
  • Last, but not least: name is misleading. id modellers did use Alias software, but we do not.
  • Said that, I did analyze all the mesh formats used in game, and my proposal is based on making the least common multiple of those. That is my point. Sandro 23:09, 1 December 2012 (SAST)


We have *two* classes named AABB in our project. Which one ? --Duke 21:59, 30 November 2012 (SAST)

  • Game defines only one. I don't care for Radiant. Sandro 22:55, 1 December 2012 (SAST)