go to
https://blogs.secondlife.com/community/forums/open-source/open-development/multi-wearables
log in using the login link on the top of the page
click on "all content" to see everything that has been posted so far
click "start a discussion" in the "actions" panel on the side to start a new
threa
I can't seem to figure out where to start a new thread about
outfits and inheritance.
How/where should we continue this discussion?
--
Carlo Wood
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Iceweasel crashes when attempts are made to post any message in the
forums. It happens as soon as the javascript editor loads.
Nyx Linden wrote:
> Forums for discussing multi-wearables and related issues can be found
> here:
> https://blogs.secondlife.com/community/forums/open-source/open-devel
Yes, I will be developing in viewer-public.
Nyx
Carlo Wood wrote:
> You mean he'll be developing in viewer-public then?
>
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 09:44:09PM -0700, Philippe (Merov) Bossut wrote:
>
>> Nyx stated he wanted to develop this feature "in the open" which means that
>> he'll be deve
You mean he'll be developing in viewer-public then?
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 09:44:09PM -0700, Philippe (Merov) Bossut wrote:
> Nyx stated he wanted to develop this feature "in the open" which means that
> he'll be developing in viewer-internal which is exported on each successful
> build (so we av
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 3:31 PM, Joel Foner wrote:
> This is a pretty generic question, but I hope it will be helpful.
>
> Under what conditions might it be possible to do a fairly quick to
> release version and then iterate the feature behavior towards
> something more sophisticated, withou
Forums for discussing multi-wearables and related issues can be found
here:
https://blogs.secondlife.com/community/forums/open-source/open-development/multi-wearables
Please re-direct all multi-wearables related conversations there - I'd
like to keep all discussion centralized so everyone knows
This is a pretty generic question, but I hope it will be helpful.
Under what conditions might it be possible to do a fairly quick to
release version and then iterate the feature behavior towards
something more sophisticated, without breaking things?
Best regards,
Joel
On 3/26/10, Carlo Wood wr
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
unless the briefs are indecent, around here i don't think anyone would
directly complain (they might talk about it being unusual with other
people, but i don't think anyone would be forbidden to enter a store,
restaurant etc just because of an slightly
> I'm greatly in favor to create bits for wearables and objects
> that stay user changable even for no-mods.
General agreement.
Needs some thought to make sure that it's not too easy to change them
accidentally and lose the creator-intended settings forever (maybe save
the original settings an
Am Donnerstag, 25. März 2010 13:38:28 schrieb Carlo Wood:
> If I go to shop in real life, it's also ME who decides
> in what order I put clothes on, not the creator of the
> clothes.
oh? try wearing your briefs on top of your pants in public...
___
Pol
I said: I want to be able to change the priority of
(no-mod) animations regardless, as user.
I definitely also want to be able to change the
order in which a wearable is layered, as opposed to
that the creator does that for me.
If I go to shop in real life, it's also ME who decides
in wha
Ah yes, using the descriptions would avoid the need
for extra protocol changes.
I'd suggest to use the keywords "skin", "tatoo", "underwear",
"shirt", "jacket", but also allow "shirt 2", "shirt 3", etc
to put things inbetween shirt and jacket.
On the downside, no-mod wearables would disallow reor
+1 Carlo, the specific priority on animations has caused confusion of
when to set them to 1, 2, 3, or 4. If it is not set correctly, then it
could mess up the other animations.
I would like to see that confusion avoided with outfits.
Carlo Wood wrote:
> On an equal note, it's extremely annoying
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:57:45PM -0400, Glen Canaday wrote:
> No change for the creator - none. Not a thing. The user gets a "bump up"
> or "bump down" item in the current "wear" submenu.. that's all. Max 3 or
> so, and they act like layers in Photoshop or Gimp, which is essentially
> what the
On an equal note, it's extremely annoying that the priority
of animations is determined at creation time.
Why can't I, as user, determine in what order I want animations
to take precedence?
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:20:19PM -0400, Glen Canaday wrote:
> Actually, I don't mind "undies, shirt, and
In the list I made, that would be for the wearer only -- not the creator.
There are:
(A) creators of the layers
(B) creator of the outfit list.
(C) wearer of the outfit
By default, (B) & (C) are the same -- the wearer.
(A) is able to supply a outfit list to help suggest layer order, but it
does
That's actually what I would like to avoid, specifically. That forces
the creator to continue to dictate whether your underwear goes on top of
your pants or not. There's no added flexibility for the resident in that.
Here's why I'll be an advocate of just a few extra numbered layers on
top of t
An easier way may just to have list without ordinals. Example:
Outfit:
* Upper-body
** Jacket
** Shirt
** Undershirt
** upper-tattoos
** custom-upper-body-skin
** another-custom-upper-body-skin
* Lower-body
** Pants
** Underpants
** lower-tattoos
** custom-lower-body-skin
** another-custom-lower-
Actually, I don't mind "undies, shirt, and jacket." What I'm really
referring to is maybe 3 undies layers numbered 1,2,3. Creators can still
specify which of those three as they do now, but the user would choose
the 1, 2, 3 bit. The creator doesn't lose the ability to choose which of
the three
I like this idea a lot. While we're talking about about increasing
flexibility though, why have a low hardcoded limit to the number of layers?
The new tattoo and alpha layers are great, but what comes next, and how
long do we keep hardcoding more specific layers? If someone wants to layer
on ten
Nyx,
Oh, I actually do have one functionality idea / request: rather than
allowing the creator to dictate the clothing layer of a wearable, can we
allow the wearer themselves choose where it goes? I can't tell you how
many times I've had to not wear something because the original creator
did
I'm a little unsure what the tiny robot means about the appearance
floater being all yucky
We'll still need it for the shape sliders, will we not? After all, it's
incredibly convenient to just put it where you want it in order to
reduce the mouse-miles involved. Sticking it ALL on the right
While this is an amazing idea I love, that of being able to use some 3rd
party tool for the task, I do not own Poser, and $250 US, it's a bit steep
just to edit my appearance.
I think there should be in-UI tools for editing your avvie's appearance, but
the addition of integrating external tools wo
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 12:58 PM, Nyx Linden wrote:
> The current iteration of the appearance floater needs to go away. The
> current implementation has been held together with chicken wire, bubble
> gum, and duct tape. It works for now, but it won't hold up to the
> addition of multiple wearable
The current iteration of the appearance floater needs to go away. The
current implementation has been held together with chicken wire, bubble
gum, and duct tape. It works for now, but it won't hold up to the
addition of multiple wearables of a given type. The currently designed
plan is to ext
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 7:57 AM, Morgaine wrote:
> Although some people will probably suggest that the *real* likelihood of
> getting the sidebar dropped is nil, I think we should take the moral high
> ground here and assume that the sidebar too is subject to community
> feedback. Let's assume th
On 2010-03-23, at 05:50, Henri Beauchamp wrote:
> Whether or not I'll develop a v2.0 branch depends on how much work
> will be
> needed to revert the whole UI (yes !) to the one currently existing
> in the
> Cool SL Viewer (which is a (much) improved, pre-voice UI).
As in, would it be easier t
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 06:57:54 +, Morgaine wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 4:35 AM, Bryon Ruxton wrote:
>
>- Could you please stop putting everything into that sidebar as the only
>way to access stuff. You've kept wanting to make this "communicator window
> "
>before into a single
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 4:35 AM, Bryon Ruxton wrote:
- Could you please stop putting everything into that sidebar as the only
way to access stuff. You've kept wanting to make this "communicator window "
before into a single un-detachable block. And despite many of use hating it
and a
Could you please stop putting everything into that sidebar as the only way
to access stuff. You¹ve kept wanting to make this ³communicator window
³ before into a single un-detachable block. And despite many of use hating
it and asking for you to make separate floaters, (or at least give us that
opt
All interesting ideas, but it would be prudent to include a floater as
an option. Not only will it make things easier on experienced users and
those who don't like the sidebar, it will make things easier for the
devs making versions of Viewer 2.0 for photo-sensitive people to use
without issue.
Good question! There is still a lot of detail left out of these
descriptions, but we are planning on moving the UI in the appearance editor
into the sidebar, along with creating a new outfit editor UI. You will still
see the results of the changes you are making on your avatar in-world in
real time
On 2010-03-22, at 12:45, Nyx Linden wrote:
> 1) A new panel to edit what is stored in your saved outfit without
> creating a new one.
>This will include both an inventory view and a view of your outfit
> itself, so you can drag items from your inventory to your outfit
> without
> having an e
Hi Mike,
I'm already on sl-ux and will keep an eye on it when I have the
time. I'll defer most discussion and decision making to a central
location (probably the forums & wiki), but would be happy to come to a
group meeting if my schedule permits (that's a little late for my
timezone, but n
Nyx, would you be willing to come to the User Experience Interest Group
meeting, Thursdays from 3-4PM at Hippotropolis (
http://slurl.com/secondlife/Hippotropolis/43/104/25 ), or share your
thoughts on the sl-ux mailing list? Jacek Antonelli (copied here) is
the moderator of the UXIG meeting.
While you are working in this area one killer feature would be to have
a way to create a "base outfit" list colors and then have the program
create copies with each color
(looking at the xml export files this would be just a matter of UUID
patching and flipping 3 fields in the data)
Bonus points
Nyx, it's excellent news that you're starting this open development
project. Well done!
There's one thing to keep in mind though, so that it doesn't come as a
surprise to anyone at the Lab (no surprise to yourself of course). When
development is open and many community teams are involved, some t
Nyx Linden wrote:
> Some of the features we want to implement:
> 1) A new panel to edit what is stored in your saved outfit without
> creating a new one.
> This will include both an inventory view and a view of your outfit
> itself, so you can drag items from your inventory to your outfit wit
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 6:45 PM, Nyx Linden wrote:
> Greetings Opensource-dev!
[snip]
> Some of the features we want to implement:
> 1) A new panel to edit what is stored in your saved outfit without
> creating a new one.
> This will include both an inventory view and a view of your outfit
> it
40 matches
Mail list logo
