Reaching for the stars: Difference between revisions

Line 20: Line 20:
{{FGCquote
{{FGCquote
|1= given that there is so much interest in spacefllight recently, it would be cool to work out what else may end up being useful sooner or later if exposed at the property tree level, i.e. to support earthview-like approaches, without having to re-implement/work around rendering logic that already resides elsewhere - even if that just means making things better configurable (or entirely optional using dedicated draw masks), while providing for a seamless transition between the corresponding approaches
|1= given that there is so much interest in spacefllight recently, it would be cool to work out what else may end up being useful sooner or later if exposed at the property tree level, i.e. to support earthview-like approaches, without having to re-implement/work around rendering logic that already resides elsewhere - even if that just means making things better configurable (or entirely optional using dedicated draw masks), while providing for a seamless transition between the corresponding approaches
|2= {{cite web
  | url    = http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?p=269035#p269035
  | title  = <nowiki>Re: Implementing moonlight (or not)</nowiki>
  | author = <nowiki>Hooray</nowiki>
  | date  = Dec 17th, 2015
  | added  = Dec 17th, 2015
  | script_version = 0.23
  }}
}}
{{FGCquote
|1= an "architecture astronaut" might end up wondering what would be required to support arbitrary [http://www.orbiterwiki.org/wiki/Category:Celestial_bodies celestial bodies] (think Moon, Mars) by exposing those using a property-configurable texture and corresponding parameters for an osg::Shape based array of LOD-enabled spheres  :D )
For instance, imagine a custom PropertyList-XML dialect for instantiating celestial bodies by specifying a position, sie, and 3D models/texture sheets for different LODs.
And yes, I would be willing to help work out the SGSubsystem/C++ and OSG magic/patches to make that happen in a generic fashion.
We already have support for adding models procedurally via /models, we can dynamically load/create/modify textures using Canvas, and we do support effects &amp; shaders - so it would mainly seem like a matter of reviewing those features to come up with an interface so that arbitrary celestial bodies can be supported using these existing features.
(note that this seems to be how celestial bodies in Orbiter are structured: [http://www.orbiterwiki.org/wiki/Category:Add-ons http://www.orbiterwiki.org/wiki/Category:Add-ons] )
|2= {{cite web
|2= {{cite web
   | url    = http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?p=269035#p269035
   | url    = http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?p=269035#p269035