SahelFllh / opencollada

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/opencollada
0 stars 0 forks source link

Incorrect target name for animation data when using namespaces #72

Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
What steps will reproduce the problem?
1. In Maya, create and animate a box with two keyframes.
2. Create a namespace, and add the box to it.
3. Export the Collada file.

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?
Expected: Animation data that references the object definition in 
<library_visual_scenes>.

Instead:  The object name defined in <library_visual_scenes> contains the 
namespace as part of its name (i.e. namespace_box1).  However, the 
animation data references the target object without the namespace pre-
pended to the name. (i.e. box1).  This prevents box1 from receiving the 
animation information.

What version of the product are you using? On what operating system?
From 'trunk' on 3/11/2010.
Using Windows x64.

Please provide any additional information below.

I was able to temporarily fix this by making the following change 
in 'COLLADAMayaAnimationExporter.cpp' on line 1292:

Before:
         else nodeId = mDocumentExporter->mayaNameToColladaName ( 
fnDagNode.name ().asChar ());

After:
         else nodeId = mDocumentExporter->mayaNameToColladaName ( 
fnDagNode.name ().asChar (), false );   

Original issue reported on code.google.com by chuckev...@intergate.com on 21 Apr 2010 at 12:28

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
we're running into a similar show-stopper.  The name space is getting into our 
animation channels... and thus all of our animations are breaking.

Any updates on this?

We're using the latest release of OpenCollada, in Maya 2011 32bit.

Original comment by kproudf...@gmail.com on 14 Oct 2010 at 10:37

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by opencollada2@googlemail.com on 19 Jan 2011 at 4:34

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
This is affecting us as well.  If we commit the source change proposed by the 
op's, can that be integrated into the next build?

Original comment by dmccart...@altego.com on 28 Sep 2011 at 8:49