Re: LANG: VRML 1.x Binary Format Proposal

Andy Norris ([email protected])
Wed, 31 May 1995 12:27:12 -0400

At 12:06 PM 5/31/95 -0400, Andy Norris wrote:
>At 11:04 AM 5/31/95, Andrew C. Esh wrote:
>
>>Why not follow what the architectural drawing experts and map makers have
>>done for years, and provide a scale indication? That way, you can specify
>>for each .wrl file that 1 unit = whatever you want. The default could be 1
>>meter (if the scale is not specified), and the convention is that the
>>scale is expressed in whole tens decimal fractions of a meter. This means
>>that a small, intricate object could be scaled in millimeters as "scale
>>1:.001", and something huge (like a planet) could have "scale 1:1000", so
>>it can be expressed in kilometers. Tens decimals means "scale 1:26" and
>>"scale 1:.37728" would be unnacceptable. This is just a simplification
>>suggestion, though. Allowing any sort of scale might make it easier to use
>>files from other systems where the scale is expressed in other units
>>(feet), instead of meters. The translation process could then provide a
>>scale tag that would make the object fit correctly in whatever space it's
>>used in.
>
>Am I right in thinking you can do this by wrapping the whole file in a Scale
>node? That way if meters are default an I want inches I just specify
>
>Scale {
> scaleFactor 39 39 39
>}

Oops. That should be something like .0256. I always get that mixed up.

--Andy