|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 13:12:46 +0100, Bernd Fuhrmann <Sil### [at] gmx de>
wrote:
> Why not? It isn't that difficult. People write XHTML, MathML and even
> SVG by hand. At least I do. So why not POVRay?
You know, there are a few not technical users of POV-Ray. While average
"artist" can easily write and understand sphere{0 r scale x*4 pigment{Red}}
anything more complicated would make understanding harder.
> It would be possible to write material libraries, object libraries and
> so on without clobbering the global namespace.
You have material and object libraries nowadays in include files.
Can you point me an example of useful namespace application within POV-Ray
scene from average unskilled user point of view?
> It would become possible to access the camera settings to adjust certain
> values.
See screens.inc include file solutions.
> This would make the implementation of HUD systems possible
Head Up Displays you mean? Which application you mean exactly?
> (useful if you want to mark or label certain things in your scene).
? Anything you can't do currently?
> One could even convert whole models to meshes and apply mesh
> modificators on them. This is AFAIK not yet possible in POVRay.
That depends what you mean by "convert" and "modificators".
ie. http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lakes/1434/images/createmesh.jpg
> Ok, maybe some of these things can be done in POVRay file format.
IMO that's not POV-Ray file format but POV-Ray features which makes things
possible.
> But if they can be done, how clean can they be done?
Some prefer question: how hard can they be done. I think writing simple
include file is easier than introducing new parser and changing habits of
large community.
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |