User talk:Geyser: Difference between revisions

m
Line 619: Line 619:
:
:
<p align=right>[[User:Ssg|Ssg]] 16:36, 26 January 2007 (CET)</p>
<p align=right>[[User:Ssg|Ssg]] 16:36, 26 January 2007 (CET)</p>
----
:I thought we were at a point where we were no longer offended by "roughness" ^^
::The "0 bit" info is misleading. All the bits in a bitset are cumulative
:::(and if they're all OFF, of course you get 0 = "nothing")
::But ''you'' make it seem like the only valid ("possible") values are 0, 1, 2, 4, 8, etc.
:::(which is what is misleading: there's only 1, 2, 4, 8, etc; each one of those is either ON or OFF)
::In other words, you're giving "everything OFF" too much of a special status. It's... yes, misleading.
:IDXA and VCRA (and PNTA, even) are generic: they get interpreted in different ways depending on where they're linked to ''from''.
:In particular, the parsing of the first IDXA (faces) is non-trivial and highly specific (see OniRip's source).
::(when you say "That's clear.", could you be more precise? are you sure you understand what face goes where and why?)
:Actually, the high bit denotes, ''in this specific case'', the first vertex of a "strip": they're ''not'' triangles.
::(and in other cases, the high bit will mean something completely different)
:Knowledge about IDXA etc should be detailed specifically to the resources that link to them.
::Look at your [http://www6.fh-eberswalde.de/user/dkriesch/oni/werte.htm werte.htm] again? See how all the generic sub-resources of an M3GM are connected? They don't make the same sense when considered out of the M3GM's context...
:That's why I say M3GM is not "done": because [http://www6.fh-eberswalde.de/user/dkriesch/oni/werte.htm THIS] is missing knowledge relative to ''M3GM'', ''not'' VCRA or IDXA...
::Sometimes the hierarchy is crucial, i.e., you have to consider a file together with its children.
:I'm surprised your page doesn't include a listing of the TXCA. How can you be sure it's irrelevant?
:Before you resume your update of the OBD pages, could you give me a list of field types you'll be putting in there? Maybe we should discuss those a little bit. That was what I suggested when I "told you to stop". A exhaustive list of data types will be useful for OUP, too (new struct def format, patching engine...).
:Another thing was our disagreement as for whether OBD table rows should be templated.
::Templates have an advantage: alignment and other cell attributes can be set globally in a nice-looking way. Only actually ''informative'' data needs to be entered on the "client" page.
::Templates have a drawback: unlike table rows, everything has to be on the same line (although one can hack around this, see [[Template:HexRow]])
:I also need your opinion (''again'', yes) on the templated tables (rather than GIFs) for the hex screenshots.
::They're more mirror- and wikibook-friendly.
:What do you think?
::[[User:Geyser|geyser]] 17:22, 26 January 2007 (CET)