Re: ElevationGrid

[Jeff Sonstein <jeffs@tlg.net>]

casteeld wrote:

> I to am disappointed with the elevationGrid node [...]

it was a compromise...

a number of us on the www-vrml list
had been struggling with a way to place VRML sets
within a "physical" context...
we had played around with the DEM ==> DXF ==> VRML
IndexedFaceSet route
and while it more or less worked
(although even fairly simplified geography
 was found to drive high-end workstations crazy)
one big problem was needing 3 numbers for each elevation
point...
so an elevation-above-ground-plane approach (somewhat like DEM)
was chosen

one of the reasons that I am glad geographers
are now a larger part of the VRML effort
is that now maybe folks will come up with something that works
better...
better for placing VRML sets and scenes within geographic
context
and better for the presentation of geographical information
itself

jeffs at the vrmLab

-- 
Jeff Sonstein, MA                http://ariadne.iz.net/
                       http://tcc.iz.net/~jeffs/vrmLab/
(Public key)         http://tcc.iz.net/~jeffs/jeffs.asc
=======================================================
There are no bugs, there are just undocumented features