[cad-linux-dev] Re: foo_style entities

  • From: Eric Wilhelm <ewilhelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: cad-linux-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 14:42:54 -0500

# The following was supposedly scribed by
# Chris Somerlot
# on Wednesday 25 August 2004 11:05 am:

>> No, the geometry is segregated from the header entities. =A0Whether they=
 are
>> in the toplevel as "<ID>.yml" or not is another issue.
>>
>> I suggested that the geometry is actually in a "model/" directory under
>> the toplevel, but Bruno and I didn't exactly come to an agreement on that
>> one.
>
>I'm confused about how we got away from the flat directory method.=20

We haven't really.  The importance of the flatness is only in assigning=20
importance to the entities.  When we put the geometry all in one level, the=
=20
circles are as important as the lines and their ID's are sequential.  That'=
s=20
because the entity needs to have the ability to be persistent.

Hmm.  Even if it changes from a line to a circle?

Layer entities, however, do not need to share a list of ID's with the=20
geometry.  They could, but it seems to make more sense that they don't.

I guess then that the hierarchy breaks into a few toplevel types.

layer
object_style
text_style
mark_style
geometry
  line
  polyline
  arc
  circle
  mark
  text
  image
  block (?)
  xref

The question about blocks is where their toplevel lives if it's inside of t=
he=20
drawing.  The block will need an entity like "5.yml" for insert point, etc=
=20
(this entity then points to the block (or xref) toplevel.)

>do we need separate sub-directories for the header info, or just one?

maybe header/layers/, etc

Should styles be grouped together?

The issue here is that you are likely to get some helpful relationships fro=
m=20
having the layer or styles entities in a directory for that type.  For=20
instance, you might have a style editor that only opens the files in styles=
/.

Sorry I can't be more help right now.  Looming deadline on Friday.

=2D-Eric
=2D-=20
"Left to themselves, things tend to go from bad to worse."
                                        --Murphy's Corollary

Other related posts: