Skip to content

Update 3DTILES_implicit_tiling and 3DTILES_subtree#114

Open
lilleyse wants to merge 1 commit into
3d-tiles-2.0from
3d-tiles-2.0-implicit
Open

Update 3DTILES_implicit_tiling and 3DTILES_subtree#114
lilleyse wants to merge 1 commit into
3d-tiles-2.0from
3d-tiles-2.0-implicit

Conversation

@lilleyse

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Updates 3DTILES_implicit_tiling and 3DTILES_subtree.

There are two main differences between this and 3D Tiles 1.1:

  1. Tile semantics such as TILE_BOUNDING_VOLUME that were previously stored in a property table are now stored in an attributes object. This helps distinguish structural attributes from application-specific properties. More motivation behind that here: Semantics vs. extensions 3d-tiles#782 (comment).
  2. Now that this is built on glTF, we can use EXT_structural_metadata to store application-specific properties.

Example of what it looks like now:

"3DTILES_subtree": {
  "tileAvailability": {
    "constant": 1
  },
  "contentAvailability": [{
    "bitstream": 0,
    "availableCount": 60
  }],
  "childSubtreeAvailability": {
    "bitstream": 1
  },
  "tileAttributes": {
    "TILE_BOUNDING_BOX": 0, // points to an accessor
    "TILE_GEOMETRIC_ERROR": 1
  },
  "contentAttributes": {
    "CONTENT_BOUNDING_BOX": 2
  },
  "tilePropertyTable": 0, // points to a property table in EXT_structural_metadata
  "contentPropertyTable": 1
}

There is still a TODO list at the bottom of each extension, but I think this could be merged as a first draft.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant