[x3d-public] IndexedTriangleSet defaults

Wed May 11 11:25:17 PDT 2016

Right, Thanks Johannes.
In this HAnim example I have not been able to test

In hanim it is possible to define certain points from several segment 
geometries to compose a deformable skin from a collection of the 
points for a continious mesh skinmesh by including specific vertices 
from
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Behr, Johannes" <johannes.behr at igd.fraunhofer.de>
To: "John Carlson" <yottzumm at gmail.com>
Cc: "Joe D Williams" <joedwil at earthlink.net>; "Andreas Plesch" 
<andreasplesch at gmail.com>; "x3d-pulbic mlist" <x3d-public at web3d.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2016 1:45 AM
Subject: Re: [x3d-public] IndexedTriangleSet defaults

> What's wrong about the TextureCoordinateGenerator ?!?
>
> http://www.web3d.org/documents/specifications/19775-1/V3.3/index.html
>
> http://doc.x3dom.org/developer/x3dom/nodeTypes/TextureCoordinateGenerator.html
>
> Best regards
> Johannes
>
>> On 2 May 2016, at 06:29, John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I found X3DOM’s Sphere very useful for creating texture and 
>> geometry coordinates.   X3D needs an upgrade!
>>
>> John
>>> On May 1, 2016, at 10:28 PM, Joe D Williams 
>>> <joedwil at earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> I think it was a simple convenience for the author of an 
>>> indexedfaceset to automatically produce a default texcoord array, 
>>> mainly by a simple copy of the x and y coords (by not z) of the 
>>> shape. This should work in all cases even if the ifs is skin of 
>>> hanim. I think historically, it should be ok if no automated 
>>> texcoord generation is offered for other shapes than ifs.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Joe
>>> .
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andreas Plesch" 
>>> <andreasplesch at gmail.com>
>>> To: "Roy Walmsley" <roy.walmsley at ntlworld.com>
>>> Cc: "X3D Graphics public mailing list" <x3d-public at web3d.org>
>>> Sent: Monday, April 11, 2016 10:03 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [x3d-public] IndexedTriangleSet defaults
>>>
>>>
>>> Apologies, I took a short cut in the hope to get to the question 
>>> directly
>>> but ended up with producing a surprise.
>>>
>>> Not sure how useful the default implementation behaviour for 
>>> texture
>>> coordinates of IndexedFaceSets is. Although I can see that there 
>>> are use
>>> cases with overall planar geometries and exactly matching map 
>>> textures.
>>>
>>> Could this implementation behaviour be a candidate for deprecation 
>>> ? In
>>> contrast, default texture coordinates for the various convenience
>>> geometries (box, plane, sphere, elevationgrid ..) are very useful.
>>>
>>> I was coming across this when I looked at three.js and its 
>>> constructors for
>>> geometry on which in turn aframe's geometric primitives are based. 
>>> Three.js
>>> does not have IndexedFaceSet but it has IndexedTriangleSet without 
>>> default
>>> texture coordinates (UV).
>>>
>>> It might be good to harmonize where possible.
>>>
>>> Since aframe is designed to be very extensible and has concepts 
>>> similar to
>>> x3d, it may be actually possible to implement a (limited) x3d 
>>> browser using
>>> aframe as the underlying framework, with x3d nodes and fields 
>>> corresponding
>>> to aframe components. A thought for another time.
>>>
>>> Andreas
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Roy Walmsley 
>>> <roy.walmsley at ntlworld.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Andreas,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Initially I was surprised by your comment below. As you say, the 
>>>> default
>>>> value of the *texCoord* field is NULL for the IndexedTriangleSet 
>>>> node.
>>>> But when I looked at the IndexedFaceSet node, I found that it too 
>>>> has a
>>>> default value of NULL for the *texCoord* field (see
>>>> http://www.web3d.org/documents/specifications/19775-1/V3.3/Part01/components/geometry3D.html#IndexedFaceSet).
>>>> So both are in agreement there.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> However, I assume you are referring to the text in the 
>>>> penultimate
>>>> paragraph for the IndexedFaceSet, which commences “If the 
>>>> *texCoord*
>>>> field is NULL, ….”. Here an implementation behaviour is detailed 
>>>> for when
>>>> the default value is NULL. In comparison, the IndexedTriangleSet 
>>>> node has
>>>> no such behaviour defined.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don’t know why the two instances are different. It is an 
>>>> interesting
>>>> observation., which is also worthy of a specification comment.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Roy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* x3d-public [mailto:x3d-public-bounces at web3d.org] *On 
>>>> Behalf Of *Andreas
>>>> Plesch
>>>> *Sent:* 11 April 2016 14:34
>>>> *To:* X3D Graphics public mailing list
>>>> *Subject:* [x3d-public] IndexedTriangleSet defaults
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For IndexedTriangleSet the default value for texCoord is NULL.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.web3d.org/documents/specifications/19775-1/V3.3/Part01/components/rendering.html#IndexedTriangleSet
>>>>
>>>> On the other hand the texCoord default value for IndexedFaceSet 
>>>> is a
>>>> reasonable map which tries to fit a texture on the mesh.
>>>>
>>>> Is there a reason for this divergence ?
>>>>
>>>> Andreas
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Andreas Plesch
>>> 39 Barbara Rd.
>>> Waltham, MA 02453
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> x3d-public mailing list
>>>> x3d-public at web3d.org
>>>> http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> x3d-public mailing list
>>> x3d-public at web3d.org
>>> http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> x3d-public mailing list
>> x3d-public at web3d.org
>> http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org
>
> 