You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The current implementation of the validator is focussed on 3D Tiles 1.1. As suggested by the semantic versioning, version 1.1 mainly consisted of additions to the existing standard, and these additional elements are covered in the validation. Beyond that, the asset.version is largely ignored. Additional checks should be added that take these version-specific differences into account. This means that certain elements (like implicit tilesets) are not valid in a 3D Tiles 1.0 tileset, and a tileset that has an asset.version of 1.0 but contains implicit tiling information should be considered to be invalid.
This is related to #231 , which specifically refers to the question of which extensions are allowed or expected in certain tileset versions.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
One specific difference between 1.0 and 1.1 that affects the validator:
in version 1.0, the tile.children was allowed to be an empty array
in version 1.1, the tile.children has the requirement of minItems: 1 in the schema.
The latter is actually an inconsistency in the spec, tracked at CesiumGS/3d-tiles#752 - depending on how this is resolved, we may consider a special treatment for this case in the validator.
The current implementation of the validator is focussed on 3D Tiles 1.1. As suggested by the semantic versioning, version 1.1 mainly consisted of additions to the existing standard, and these additional elements are covered in the validation. Beyond that, the
asset.version
is largely ignored. Additional checks should be added that take these version-specific differences into account. This means that certain elements (like implicit tilesets) are not valid in a 3D Tiles 1.0 tileset, and a tileset that has anasset.version
of1.0
but contains implicit tiling information should be considered to be invalid.This is related to #231 , which specifically refers to the question of which extensions are allowed or expected in certain tileset versions.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: