Re: LANG: VRML Transforms (fwd)

Colin Dooley ([email protected])
Mon, 9 Oct 1995 10:07:58 GMT


At 10:32 6/10/95 -0700, you wrote:

>> C> The only way to do multiple transformations which makes any sense is:
>> C> 1) Scale
>> C> 2) Rotate
>> C> 3) Translate
>> C> Anything else will probably cause confusion at some point.
>
>The order specified above is NOT the only way that makes sense. What makes
>sense at any given time depends on what you are trying to achieve. In fact,
>enforcing an ordering like that above makes it more difficult to achieve
>certain arrangments of objects. In any case, that is not the issue.
>

If you want to do something fancy, why don't you just put the whole
transformation matrix in with a matrixTransform node :)

The Translate-Rotate-Scale nodes are just for simple positioning of objects
in a world, and I still say that:

[vertex] x [scale] x [rotate] x [translate]

(where vertex is a homogeneous coordinate, and the rest are 4x4 matrices)

is the only sensible way to do this.

Think of somebody trying to add an object to a world using a text editor,
any other way of doing things is going to confuse the hell out of him...

Colin


  • Next message: Colin Dooley: "Re: LANG: VRML Transforms (fwd)"
  • Previous message: Master Zap: "Re: LANG: LOD"
  • Maybe in reply to: Patrick Sweeney: "LANG: VRML Transforms (fwd)"
  • Next in thesad: Michael Pichler: "Re: LANG: VRML Transforms (fwd)"