Difference between revisions of "X3D v4.0 CAD Improvements"

From Web3D.org
Jump to: navigation, search
(establish baseline)
 
m
Line 1: Line 1:
These are proposed changes under consideration by the [[X3D CAD]] Working Group.
+
These are proposed changes for a future X3D v3.4 Specification under consideration by the [[X3D CAD]] Working Group.
  
 
== X3D CAD Component ==
 
== X3D CAD Component ==

Revision as of 14:11, 17 August 2012

These are proposed changes for a future X3D v3.4 Specification under consideration by the X3D CAD Working Group.

X3D CAD Component

Child-node relationships more explicit

  • Many parent-child node relationships are vague, leading to difficulty deciding which children are allowed. For example, X3DGroupingNode is implemented by many candidate nodes.
  • These relationships are strictly captured in the X3D DTD and X3D Schema, with further support in X3D Schematron
  • In order to best support model export and interoperability, the child nodes are limited to those listed in the CADInterchange Profile

Proposed specification prose: needed.

Tesselation consistency

  • Exporters can significantly reduce file size using primitive-geometry nodes (e.g. Cylinder, Disk2D, etc.)
  • Tesselation quality is not strictly defined in X3D
  • In order to match polygonal tessellation strictly and avoid "cracks" between adjactent geometry, some form of association is needed (similar to the NURBSet node)
  • CADPart semantics can be improved to include this constraint

Proposed specification prose: needed.


X3D CADInterchange Profile

Improved nodeset

Nodes to add:

Nodes to remove:

Renaming necessary?

Extensive changes to this profile may make backwards compatibility difficult. X3D profiles do not support a concept of level as components do.

  • Should the profile be renamed for clarity, maintaining the old profile separately?
  • Alternatively should the old profile be deprecated?
  • Is there a better way to express this evolution, simply noting that the v3.4 profile is different?