Re: [clutter] 2.5D?

On Nov 15, 2007 9:43 AM, Tomas Frydrych <tf@o-hand.com> wrote:
> That's not strictly the case, and perhaps needs further clarification:
> ClutterActors are *abstracted* as having no depth, for reasons Matthew
> explained, and clutter UIs are built from the actors on the base of that
> abstraction. However, you can create custom actors that have 'depth' if
> you want them to (e.g., toys/odo), indeed any actor group will have
> implicit z dimension if you rotate any of its children along x or y axis.
>

I agree on that.
depth is confusing because it feels like just a "renaming" of a
functionality of OpenGL.
While discovering Clutter, I first asked myself if depth meant
something like a "z-order" in a stack (it can indeed be use like that)
or if it was the z coordinate of the actor (which it is).
I think the abstraction argument doesn't quite hold because in any
case one has to understand the 3D aspect of the clutter stage when
using rotation.
Full 3D is one of the key advantages of using OpenGL under the hood,
so I would more clearly expose that.

regards,
Christophe

-- 
To unsubscribe send a mail to clutter+unsubscribe@o-hand.com