Mathias Broxvall wrote:
> 
> Jens Christian Restemeier <jch### [at] hrzuni-bielefeldde> wrote:
> 
> > Hey, that's a cool idea. Have you contacted the POVRAY members, to
> > support POB as an official file-format ?
> 
> Oh no!!! Povray is a great language, but;
> 
> 1] The povray language is turing complete -> no all
>   3D applications want to allow "programs" in the documents.
>   (For example - you can actually write postscript "viruses"
>    and simply postscript files which loops indefinatly and have
>    other "bugs" in them)
> 
> 2] That would rather limit the possibilities of "enhancing" the
>   language. Someone once claimed you where quite limited by not
>   having any delimiters (like ';') between the "sentences" or
>   objects. I'm not sure it's true - but maybe it's good if such
>   a thing could be added to the language. (A small hack could
>   probably convert all oldstyle includes/scenes to the new syntax)

So what is this going to mean ? 
I was suggesting to support the binary POV format, as produced by the
patched POVRAY in the POB_SDK, as an additinal input-format in the
official POV.
The idea of POB is quite nice: POVRAY parses the scene, and writes a
binary object-file (like 3ds or lightwave), which can be easily loaded
by viewers, previewers, modelers and converters.

This could even simplify the normal POVRAY package: it is split into a
renderer and a parser (or better: compiler).
You write your normal scenes in the POVRAY script-language, and compile
it into a binary scene. Then you pass the binary file into the renderer.

But the current POB package has a major disadvantage, which makes it
unuseable for a project I had in mind: It doesn't store the names, that
are defined in a scene-name.

			Jens Ch. Restemeier

Post a reply to this message