Benjamin Moody Wrote:Regarding "overscan", by which I guess you mean what happens to polygons, or parts of polygons, that fall outside the boundaries of the texture
Yes, although I admit overscan probably isn't the best name for it. Travis wrote in the big LDPartEditor thread part authors should prevent (or minimize) the effect by just not supplying geometry inside a texmap block that shouldn't be texture mapped. So in my above example the cylinder should be divided in two one part inside the texmap block and one outside it.
I agree that's that the best way to go but again it should be mentioned. I also like your GL_CLAMP_TO_BORDER suggestion, such behavior would be nice for the outer triangles of the mapped geometry. But then again the part author could easily force the same behavior by adding some alpha 0 padding to the texture when isolating/splitting the geometry is a problem. I'm using GL_CLAMP by the way
but I also limit uv to 0..1 so it basically repeats the outer pixels for the out of bound region.This brings me to another point having the hard 0..1 cut of (as suggested in the spec) robs us from using repeating pasterns, something that could be very useful when scaling/deforming texture mapped primitives (e.g. a texture mapped rope)
Benjamin Moody Wrote:On the subject of the TEXMAP spec, another serious issue is the definition of gloss maps
I currently chose to ignore the gloss map option as I was unsure of it's use thinking material properties should be handled by the color number exclusively unless it act's like a mask (which I suspect it is intended to do).