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

Material properties chapter number missing in nav #121

Open
ClemensLinnhoff opened this issue Sep 26, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

Material properties chapter number missing in nav #121

ClemensLinnhoff opened this issue Sep 26, 2024 · 1 comment
Assignees
Labels
isSubGroup:MATERIAL isType:Bug An issue that contains contradictions or errors in the standard.

Comments

@ClemensLinnhoff
Copy link
Collaborator

Describe the bug
The number of the material properties chapter is missing
This is probably because the name is manually changed in the nav file. It would be better to change this in the asciidoc generation from the schema files. Then we don't need the manual naming in the nav anymore.

Expected behavior
Show the correct chapter number in the nav bar

Screenshots
image

@ClemensLinnhoff ClemensLinnhoff added isType:Bug An issue that contains contradictions or errors in the standard. isSubGroup:MATERIAL labels Sep 26, 2024
@ClemensLinnhoff ClemensLinnhoff self-assigned this Sep 26, 2024
@ClemensLinnhoff
Copy link
Collaborator Author

We should discuss the general structure of describing the file formats of asset files, material files, emp material files and brdf material files.

Currently we have a section for the metadata respectively for geometry and material. And we have sections for material properties and lookup tables:

  • 7 Geometry
    • ...
    • 7.4 File format
    • 7.5 Metadata
    • (7.6 Material mapping?)
  • 8 Material
    • ...
    • 8.2 File format
    • 8.3 Metadata
    • 8.4 Material properties
    • 8.5 Lookup tables
      • 8.5.1 Electromagnetic properties

Do we want to keep it this way or change to a structuring per file?

  • 7 Geometry
    • ...
    • 7.4 Asset file
      • 7.4.1 metadata
      • 7.4.2 materialMappingUri
    • 7.5 Material mapping file
      • 7.5.1 metadata
      • 7.5.2 materialMapping
  • 8 Material
    • ...
    • 8.2 Material file
      • 8.2.1 metadata
      • 8.2.2 materialProperties
    • 8.3 Electromagnetic properties
      • 8.3.1 metadata
      • 8.3.2 electromagneticProperties
    • 8.4 Brdf lookup table
      • 8.4.1 metadata
      • 8.4.2 brdf

In my opinion the second option is more structured and describes more clearly the different file formats. But we have to think about the metadata. Does each file have its own definition or do for example all material files have the same metadata definition? If the latter is the case, then we would introduce some redundancy to the documentation.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
isSubGroup:MATERIAL isType:Bug An issue that contains contradictions or errors in the standard.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant