Closed emackey closed 1 month ago
I can rename the folder and files to match.
The asset has a non-animated version because it was built for use with the Khronos glTF Viewer which doesn't support KHR_animation_pointer, KHR_materials_transmissionm, nor KHR_materials_volume.
Subsequently I made an animated version, and thought since it looked great (and we need more animation-pointer examples) perhaps we should add it to the repo. But I'm OK with removing it if needed.
@emackey Should I make a new folder for the animated version of PotOfCoals?
Should I make a new folder for the animated version of PotOfCoals?
Yes, I think so. The organizational structure here still has a limitation inherited from the predecessor repository, where it doesn't make any clear allowance for several similar copies of almost the same model with various modifications applied. Often a set of variations of a model are not particularly appealing or understandable to users, but as we see here, there can be technical reasons why one user would want a different variation from another. Given the current folder structure, I think we can only present these as two separate models, such as PotOfCoals and PotOfCoalsAnimated, or similar.
Suggestions welcome.
Submitting animated asset via PR #127
PotOfCoals
, notglTFPotOfCoals
.glTF-Animation
.via https://github.com/KhronosGroup/glTF-Sample-Assets/pull/90#issuecomment-1879143470