POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.documentation.inbuilt : BITMAP_TYPE and HF_TYPE documentation versus functionality. : Re: BITMAP_TYPE and HF_TYPE documentation versus functionality. Server Time
30 May 2024 11:47:20 EDT (-0400)
  Re: BITMAP_TYPE and HF_TYPE documentation versus functionality.  
From: William F Pokorny
Date: 5 Feb 2018 06:44:33
Message: <5a7843a1$1@news.povray.org>
On 02/04/2018 02:45 PM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> On 1/8/2018 6:22 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>> i'll follow up when i have more than a few moments ... which hasn't 
>> been very often lately
> http://wiki.povray.org/content?title=Special:RecentChanges&hidebots=0
> click in the "diff" link to see what's been changed

For all but the height_field page - which already has the optional 
indicator brackets around HF_TYPE - we should add braces [] around 
BITMAP_TYPE to indicate those specifications are also optional.

There is also sometimes text which needs to be changed too - or perhaps 
as well deleted. The material_map section for example has:

"After the required BITMAP_TYPE keyword is a string expression 
containing the name of a bitmapped material file of the specified type."

When today BITMAP_TYPE is not required and it is not in fact completely 
necessary to indicate the type by the filename if your input type 
matches POV-Rays current output type. This relates to the hierarchy of 
methods POV-Ray uses to determine the file type to read. I attempted to 
outline what happens. Today we today best describe it all in our 
image_map documentation though the fact BITMAP_TYPE is optional is not 
indicated there-in - as yet.

Not sure repeating POV-Ray's type decision hierarchy in every 'map' 
section is necessary though - perhaps get it right / flush it out in the 
image_map doc with some method to reference it from the others?

Bill P.

Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.