-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
Adjust Object Model for morph targets #2550
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Adjust Object Model for morph targets #2550
Conversation
javagl
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks fine for me in view of the discussion that happened in the linked issue (several people seemed to agree that this is the way to go). I'm not deeply involved in implementations of the object model, so while I can 'Approve' this, it could be good to wait for a second pair of eyes before actually merging.
aaronfranke
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm curious about the intended use cases for weights on the mesh objects themselves. I know the spec says "These weights MUST be used when node.weights is undefined", but are these default values expected to be copied, or are these intended to keep applying if the mesh weights changed somehow? Regardless of the answer to this question, in practice it would be tricky for implementations to deal with mesh weights, so I am in favor of requiring that the object model only allows node weights.
With this PR, the
|
|
I can't say I've look at the issues enough to understand the nuances, but we did have issues implementing this in Babylon.js that are still not resolved, so making this simpler is good. Do we have samples/examples that we can use to test this? |
I don't think we ever had sample assets with For
|
I think it's harder to review the changes without actually trying to implement the changes. We should have some samples to be confident with the implementation. |
|
This PR removes an under-defined and previously untested part of the Object Model scope. |
|
That's fair. |
|
@lexaknyazev I have some interactivity tests created based on your list. |
|
@robertdorn83 I think the first test is incorrect:
So |
have changed it! |
Fixes #2549.
/cc @aaronfranke @hybridherbst @robertdorn83