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

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.

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.

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.

Nodes to add:

Nodes to remove:

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?

Revision as of 14:10, 17 August 2012 (view source) Brutzman (Talk \| contribs) (establish baseline)		Revision as of 14:11, 17 August 2012 (view source) Brutzman (Talk \| contribs) m Newer edit →
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 ==