Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

cube mapping proposal #266

Closed
fabrobinet opened this issue Apr 28, 2014 · 8 comments
Closed

cube mapping proposal #266

fabrobinet opened this issue Apr 28, 2014 · 8 comments

Comments

@fabrobinet
Copy link
Contributor

Right now cube mapping proposal is mixed with filtering discussion here: #40 let's discuss the schema in this issue

@fabrobinet
Copy link
Contributor Author

Common profile with OpenCOLLADA doesn't support cube maps, I am adding it, if I get the impemtnation working the specification side should follow quickly.

@pjcozzi pjcozzi added this to the glTF 1.0 milestone Apr 30, 2014
@pjcozzi pjcozzi mentioned this issue Apr 30, 2014
8 tasks
@fabrobinet
Copy link
Contributor Author

For the record, the latest proposal (modulo the values that are now not string but gl enum) was:

 "texture1" : {
    "target" : TEXTURE_CUBE,
    "internalFormat" : RGBA,
    "format" : RGBA,   
    "sources" ["img1_negX","img1_posX","img1_negY","img1_posY","img1_negZ","img1_posZ"],
    "sampler" : "sampler1"
  },

sources refers to imagesentries but I guess could also use textures if such extension is used or if it is part of core for other GL profiles.

@pjcozzi
Copy link
Member

pjcozzi commented Jul 28, 2014

OK with me. I'll make the schema a bit more precise to say that each image needs to be the same dimensions and so on.

sources refers to imagesentries but I guess could also use textures if such extension is used or if it is part of core for other GL profiles.

To start, I suggest it just be able to reference images.

@fabrobinet fabrobinet added dev-7 and removed dev-7 labels Jul 29, 2014
@fabrobinet fabrobinet mentioned this issue Aug 13, 2014
5 tasks
@pjcozzi
Copy link
Member

pjcozzi commented Aug 27, 2015

I suggest we pass on this for 1.0 to keep us focused.

@pjcozzi pjcozzi removed this from the Spec 1.0 milestone Aug 27, 2015
@pjcozzi
Copy link
Member

pjcozzi commented Sep 1, 2015

Any thoughts on pushing this post 1.0?

@pjcozzi
Copy link
Member

pjcozzi commented Sep 16, 2015

Pushing post 1.0.

@pjcozzi
Copy link
Member

pjcozzi commented Feb 13, 2017

Close as duplicate with #835?

@lexaknyazev
Copy link
Member

+1

@pjcozzi pjcozzi closed this as completed Feb 13, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants