I take Massimo's point about the formed sticker being the "definitive" state which represents the true intended use case.
However, stickers are shipped flat on sheets, so a person modeling from the real-life part is going to use this as a basis; furthermore, I agree that this is the only form in which the real dimensions can be accurately measured. Also, when authoring the sticker pattern from a reference image, the best reference images are always going to be of the sticker in its flat form. So this should be the state from which its real physical characteristics (its size, the content of its pattern, etc.) are modeled.
With that being the case, I think any pending regulations on the size of stickers should account for the current proposal that LDraw code be added to the texmap functionality, because the manner of projection from flat to formed will surely have an impact on the relationship between the two geometries.
I also think the decision should be informed by how the tools that are currently in use, such as Pattern Folder, actually accomplish projecting the pattern and building up the stickerback thickness.
There is also the possibility that a texture might be projected onto surfaces of varying sizes depending on user settings, such as primitive substitution, and so the dimensions of a formed sticker part may indeed be variable.
In other words, I don't think any specification should exist regarding the size relationship between flat and formed stickers (and I don't think one is proposed), if that contravenes the result obtained by the actual utilities that carry out the spec.
However, stickers are shipped flat on sheets, so a person modeling from the real-life part is going to use this as a basis; furthermore, I agree that this is the only form in which the real dimensions can be accurately measured. Also, when authoring the sticker pattern from a reference image, the best reference images are always going to be of the sticker in its flat form. So this should be the state from which its real physical characteristics (its size, the content of its pattern, etc.) are modeled.
With that being the case, I think any pending regulations on the size of stickers should account for the current proposal that LDraw code be added to the texmap functionality, because the manner of projection from flat to formed will surely have an impact on the relationship between the two geometries.
I also think the decision should be informed by how the tools that are currently in use, such as Pattern Folder, actually accomplish projecting the pattern and building up the stickerback thickness.
There is also the possibility that a texture might be projected onto surfaces of varying sizes depending on user settings, such as primitive substitution, and so the dimensions of a formed sticker part may indeed be variable.
In other words, I don't think any specification should exist regarding the size relationship between flat and formed stickers (and I don't think one is proposed), if that contravenes the result obtained by the actual utilities that carry out the spec.