Am 18.09.2010 16:16, schrieb Vo Minh Thu:
Ok. I'll learn more about Collada then. Is your code already available somewhere?
I will upload it in a few days on hackage. It is not finished yet.
Still, Collada seems to be on a far end of the spectrum of what could be unified. I mean, say your animation has to be rendered by some Haskell code, do you wish to go through Collada or that your animation code and the rendering code share some other data structures than Collada (Or maybe Collada is just a first step?) ? If the later, it would be useful to share what those other data structures should be.
Animations in Collada are streams of interpolated floats that are interpreted as time or output (i.e. angle of a rotation). The output is then channeled to the tags of the nodes. One can do quite a lot with this. At the moment I can't image what else one could do.
When I said I thought about solidifying things lately, I was thinking to the problem you describe but at a lower level: for instance there are many different representations for 3D vectors and transforms. Is it also a concern for you? This is a problem. But I would accept a majority vote. At the moment I would use the same vector library as gpipe. Why a majority vote? Maybe we can do better: state some desired properties, benchmark the existing libraries and see if something fits?
Are there other people interested in unifying the efforts here?
Cheers, Thu