-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 34
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[Feature Request] TilesetCombiner
fails for older tilesets with content adressed by url
property instead of uri
#43
Comments
We have been pondering this question internally. The pragmatic view is: All inputs have to be valid. And for the case of the But... I can see that this is... invonvenient, particularly when the reason for something not working properly is literally that of a single letter (or "a pixel", as in "the difference between i and l...). One reason of why we are (currently) not just ignoring this point is that the generalization of this question could be: Which forms of "invalid" inputs should be "ignored"? Or: Which parts of the (One example: When you That being said: The case of the content So I agree that we should consider to make the tools more resilient for the particular, very special case of |
Hi again, and again thanks for all this context, very useful. Good question regarding whether the output And it's true this |
Edit final questions related to tiling:
|
Ideally, doing an The
Both have pros and cons. We'll have to sort that out.. Regarding the last questions...:
The
Sorry, I'm lacking a lot of context here. It sounds like this might be related to external tilesets in general, and maybe something that involves additive refinement. But I don't know Potree well enough to say more here. You might consider bringing this up in the forum at https://community.cesium.com/c/3d-tiles/16 , maybe someone with knowledge about Potree and a better understanding of your goals could chime in there. |
Thanks again for all the details regarding the intricacies of such a Also thanks to highlight that this Finally regarding my last comment, I used Potree simply to illustrate my point - and indeed That resulting tileset would be made mostly of pointers to external, focus (monument- or city-wide), tilesets, probably each inserted at a level in the hierarchy depending on where the inserted tileset tree representation differs from the hierarchy of the current tileset. The thing I'm not entirely sure is whether this insertion step would be covered by the |
Regarding the last points:
That's right. The The questions rather sound like very broad and general questions about design decisions and best practices for creating actual, real-world tilesets. And when the question is "How to define a 3D Tiles tileset of the world?", then there are (too) many variables to consider.
There probably are tilesets that represent the city of Paris with the Eiffel Tower just being a box with 8 vertices. But you might very well create a scan of the Eiffel Tower as a 10-billion-point photogrammetry model. And there is no blanket statement about where to "insert" such a model in your tile/tileset hierarchy. All I can say for now is that the mechanisms of 3D Tiles offer many degrees of freedom here. So you might have a tileset of Paris where the Eiffel Tower is a "box" with a high |
Again thanks for all these details, very useful to understand the state of this toolset. And indeed probably not the right place to share these thoughts - the way I did it here is because from my point of view this could be what merge/combine are meant to do - combining tilesets, merging two or more hierarchical structures keeping only the lowest error/highest detail data. You're right I'll iterate over these thoughts and ask along the way to the community forum instead if I need some feedback. Thanks again for all your help! |
As I mentioned, there are some thoughts about possible extensions of the tools in the future. These thoughts differ in how likely it is for them to become actual points on a roadmap. One example is that we have 'combine' (which creates one large tileset from one that had external tilesets), but we don't have an opposite of that - i.e. there is no "split" function. This could, in some way, be a low-hanging fruit: Just traverse the tileset, and whenever you reach depth Now we could go and implement that. But...
And before starting something like that, one should at least have a rough idea about how it could be generalized. For example: People might not want to split their tileset into "slices" with But if you have ideas (or even specific demand) for a certain functionality, just let us know... (or... open a PR, of course...) |
When using the
combine
method on tilesets produced by ContextCapture, then an errorContent does not have a URI
is raised. This is probably because the tile contents in the tileset root json file (plus subsequent tiles) are referred to via theurl
property rather than theuri
property - which references either b3dm or json tile contents.I know I can use the 3d-tiles-tools
upgrade
utility on local tilesets I do manage - although it will take a lot of time to upgrade loads of tilesets.But for tilesets I do not manage, which are stored online on different servers and that I'd like to combine, then the easiest way would be for the
combine
utility to allow for tilesets which use either theurl
or theuri
property to reference tile content.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: