Discussion - proposal to extend !TEXMAP specification


RE: Discussion - proposal to extend !TEXMAP specification
#32
(2026-02-11, 7:55)Roland Melkert Wrote: I don't see the need to make any kind of special type of subfile, any ldraw file could be rendered into a texture.

The spec needs only to dictate the projection and depth buffer settings.

I'm thinking specifically about the <pngfile> argument in the current TEXMAP meta syntax. We would need to add ldrfile as an option here; anything else? Maybe txtfile?

Do we need !CODE? For library purposes I assume LDraw texture files would need to exist as standalone .ldr files, but for personal projects it seems useful to be able to drop in a few lines of code without needing to build correct headers, etc.

Second question:
How can we make the "receiving" surface—that is, the <geometry1> data in the !: meta—invisible? Is that possible now (with a PNG file) or would something have to be added?
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Messages In This Thread
RE: Discussion - proposal to extend !TEXMAP specification - by N. W. Perry - 2026-02-11, 14:34

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)