[Bf-committers] Patch for naming of "UVTexture Layer"
Daniel Salazar - 3Developer.com
zanqdo at gmail.com
Sun Nov 20 23:46:26 CET 2011
Elaborating, the fact that a common feature has some extra
functionality related to Blender specific design is not a good reason
to get "creative" about such common names. Blender's vertex/edge/faces
can store other data too, however this is secondary, no need to
name them something fancy because of that right? and this last years a
lot of effort has been made into streamlining blender in this sense.
It's easier to explain that our UV maps can also store image links for
use in X and Y feature in the game engine or what ever than coming out
with a new name just because of some extra functionality.
On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 4:17 PM, Daniel Salazar - 3Developer.com
<zanqdo at gmail.com> wrote:
> Frankly i couldn't care less about the face texture assignment, it's
> only used by legacy features AFAIK. UV Map is the generic name that
> anyone recognizes.
> You would need to give strong reasons NOT to use the generic name of a
> feature so common in CG, not the other way around!! Start simple, if
> really needed change it the least possible. We are not alone in the CG
> world neither invented UV Mapping ;)
> Daniel Salazar
> On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Gaia Clary
> <gaia.clary at machinimatrix.org> wrote:
>> In fact it is NOT a UV Map. The construct is more a container which
>> a UV Map and a set of textures, so:
>> UV Layer = 1 UVMap + n Texture(s)
>> That's why its not called "UV Map". So what would be a better name then ?
>> maybe "UVContainer" comes to mind. But that's also questionable IMHO.
>> BTW i meanwhile have added the Patch to the patch tracker as proposed by
>> There is a bit more of explanation.
>> Am 20.11.2011 17:01, schrieb Daniel Salazar - 3Developer.com:
>>> I think the correct term is uv map, uv maps cant be layered so why
>>> naming them like that? There can be *multiple* UV maps of course but
>>> they have no relation between them. The relation is defined in their
>>> usage, let it be textures that can be layered of course or any other
>>> type of usage for a UV map.
>>> If UVs are layers, why arent vgroups layers too? Also why not stick to
>>> what is the standard terminology?
>>> I don't know if you see my point or i need to explain my self better
>>> good day
>>> Daniel Salazar
>>> On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Gaia Clary
>>> <gaia.clary at machinimatrix.org> wrote:
>>>> I believe that the term "UVTexture Layer" and related terms are a bit
>>>> confusing on the User interface level. So i created a patch which
>>>> renames some GUI elements:
>>>> In particular:
>>>> "UV Texture" -> "UV Layer" (text label)
>>>> "UVTex" -> "UVLayer" (default name of new UVLayer)
>>>> "UV Texture Layer" -> "UV Layer"
>>>> "Name of UV unwrapping layer" -> "Name of UV Layer"
>>>> "Active UV Texture" -> "Active UV Layer"
>>>> "Active UV Texture Index" -> "Active UV layer Index""Add UV texture
>>>> layer" -> "Add UV layer"
>>>> "Assign Image to UV Texture" -> "Assign Image to UV Layer"
>>>> "Remove UV texture layer" -> "Remove UV Layer"
>>>> I hesitate to add this patch to the patch tracker because it may not be
>>>> acurate or even wrong. Hence i ask for your feedback on this.
>>>> thanks a lot
>>>> Bf-committers mailing list
>>>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>>> Bf-committers mailing list
>>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>> Bf-committers mailing list
>> Bf-committers at blender.org
More information about the Bf-committers