Warp wrote:
> 
>   As I said in p.b-t, it should be "specular on/off".
> 
>   You say that it should be "specularless" for consistency with "shadowless".
> I disagree. The "shadowless" keyword syntax is a relic, and not very good.
> (Why there has to be a different keyword for light sources and for objects?)
> 
>   So the problem is not with "specular on/off". The problem is really with
> "shadowless", which should better be "shadows on/off" for both light sources
> and objects (and "shadowless" and "no_shadow" should be removed or at least
> deprecated).
> 
>   There's also another advantage of using "specular on/off": It contaminates
> less the already bloated namespace of the POV-Ray syntax. (And substituting
> "shadowless/no_shadow" with "shadows on/off" also reduces the number of
> reserved keywords by one.)

Interesting idea, although 'specular off' for objects would be quite
weird.  Another problem comes with the other no_* keywords.  

no_image -> image off     would seem OK, but
no_reflection -> reflection off     would be extremely irritating since
it's not clear what reflection you actually turn off.

And now that we are talking about this stuff i would also find a
no_radiosity or radiosity on/off modifier for objects very useful.

Christoph

-- 
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other 
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/

Post a reply to this message