Gary Scholl wrote:
> 2) "The VRML proposal provides a more compact and elegant data structure."
> -- Yea, that's nifty, I like that. However, lots of us have already
> invested in dealing with the STL format so the cost of conversion is too
> high when compared with the added value of the space saving.
The compactness point has not been shown. The original poster compared
a VRML file to an ASCII STL file. This was probably so that apples
could be compared to apples (i.e., both formats are ASCII). Such a
comparison is misleading. A currently unanswered question is whether
a VRML file is smaller than the corresponding binary STL file.
--> Mike Brindley firstname.lastname@example.org Corvallis, Oregon, USA
"I take unanimity on any difficult topic as a danger sign."
- P. J. Plaugher
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jun 05 2001 - 22:37:05 EEST