> I vote for meters being the standard of measure (that is the OI
> convention, and works well for most real-world objects). I think
> millimeters are too small, kilometers are too big, and not using the
> metric system would be stupid.
I actually think that all of these (and a lot of other) properties are a type of
ambient property (part of Microsoft's hideous OLE terminology, used
completely frivolously here. Owen can add this to the jardon dict :) ). In this
instance, I am thinking of the space which contains an object defining the
scale units of the objects contained within it. I see no reason to limit
ourselves to a metric system, though we should certainly support one. For
example, should I choose to implement a model of the local galactic cluster, I
might find meters a touch on the small side ... but for Fred's kitchen, they (or
millimeters, or cm, whatever) would probably be what I'd need.
I also think "inside space" co-ordinate systems and "outside space"
co-ordinate systems are different things. What about the galactic model
sitting, fishtank like, on my bookshelf ? On the outside it is quite small, but
inside .. really huge ...
-- Mike