Argent Stonecutter wrote: > > On 2010-03-25, at 11:08, Nyx Linden wrote: >> Inside each category, you can >> have multiple items up to a reasonable maximum. When you "wear" a shirt, >> it gets added to the top of the list of shirts that you are wearing. If >> you don't want it to be on top, you can push it down below other shirts. > > OK, here's the one little problem (and it is a little problem) I see > with this. We currently have designers who are doing things like > putting shirts on underwear layers or jacket layers, or jackets on > shirt layer + pants layer, because they're trying to give you > workarounds for the current limited situation. For some designers who > give you options on all layers (usually on copy-no-transfer items) > you're good to go, but for designers who were selling no-copy-transfer > items and only gave you one item (cos that's what you bought... fair > enough)... let's see what happens... > > Say I have a vest on a shirt layer (because it came with a jacket), > and a shirt on a jacket layer (because it's "untucked"). In the brave > new world I should be able to wear my shirt under my vest, now I can > wear multiple wearables. But because the jacket layer is over the > shirt layer, I don't get to use this combo. > > Now, you could go "you're still able to do everything you can right > now" and you'd be right, but while you're loading extra awesome into > the client how about turning it up to 11?
That would actually be turning it up to about 15, as far as a code architecture standpoint is concerned :) I'm certainly open to suggestions on how to do this, but the current architecture is very much directed towards a specific rendering order of drawing all tattoos under all undershirts under all shirts under all jackets (where 'jackets' are WT_JACKET wearable types, regardless of what the creator intended them to appear to be). My initial answer to that request is "we don't have time to implement that right now", but I'd be happy to have a more in-depth technical discussion as to how that could be implemented in the future. If the community is able to come up with a proposed implementation where layer order is truly arbitrary, regardless of wearable type, without damaging the intuitiveness of the user interface or expanding required development time too far, I'd love to go over such a proposal. Feel free to contact me for more details if you'd like, but I'd prefer to save the full debate for when we get the forums up, as not everyone subscribes / tracks this list. Hopefully this will be up soon. Alternative proposals for handling this situation: adding a lower body texture to WT_SHIRT? developing a way to convert one wearable type to another (assuming the wearable is mod-able, which I realize is asking a lot)? -Nyx _______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
