Blueprint https://blueprints.launchpad.net/or/+spec/digital-alignment-in-3dcabs

[Csantucci]

Alignment of digitals in 3D cabs.
See also http://www.elvastower.com/forums/index.php?/topic/35498-justification-alignment-for-digitals-in-3dcabs/#entry275959

[Sharpe49]

This bug report will also be resolved by this change:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/or/+bug/1891210

[Sharpe49]

I tested this PR. It works properly.
But I think the new getter method is superfluous.

[Sharpe49]

Also, these new values for the Justification parameter can be documented in the manual, I think.

[Csantucci]

Also, these new values for the Justification parameter can be documented in the manual, I think.

Yes, that's correct. I'll do that once the blueprint gets approved.

[twpol]

The feature request itself – alignment of digital displays in 3D cabs – is good

[twpol]

This change is not okay; this enum is for the popup windows and adding values that are not used by the popup windows is confusing and wrong – CabViewDigitalRenderer should be using its own enum if you want additional/different enum values

[Csantucci]

I will put in a comment the explanation that I have written here http://www.elvastower.com/forums/index.php?/topic/35498-justification-alignment-for-digitals-in-3dcabs/page__view__findpost__p__275959 : as of now existing 3D cabs have left-aligned digitals independently from the value of Justification. If I now respect the value of Justification,, existing 3D cabs will change the alignment of their digitals, which is not desirable.

[twpol]

This response does not match the issue here. You cannot add these three values to this particular enum. It is completely and utterly the wrong thing to do here.

If you absolutely must keep track of 6 different alignment values, please create a new enum in the cab view code.

[twpol]

I'm sure you have a reason for using 4, 5, 6 here instead of 1, 2, 3 so please can you put that reason into a comment here (I would rather use 1, 2, 3)

But, whatever that reason, I definitely do not see why you need those three additional values for Alignment. Why not read 4, 5, 6 and store as LabelAlignment.Center, LabelAlignment.Left, LabelAlignment.Right?

[Csantucci]

I can put in a comment the explanation that I have written here http://www.elvastower.com/forums/index.php?/topic/35498-justification-alignment-for-digitals-in-3dcabs/page__view__findpost__p__275959 : as of now existing 3D cabs have left-aligned digitals independently from the value of Justification. If I now respect the value of Justification,, existing 3D cabs will change the alignment of their digitals, which is not desirable.
Your proposal does not solve the above problem. If you prefer, I can use a new field in the .cvf control, e.g. ORTS3DAlignment, which can have values 1, 2 or 3, and check that one in the 3D cab code.

[twpol]

Are there many 3D cabs that will seriously break if you used the same 1, 2, 3 values?

We are adding a lot of confusion complexity with 4, 5, 6 here so we need to justify that it is absolutely necessary.

[Csantucci]

James, I see that especially commercial content developers are offering 3D cabs. I suppose they aren't happy if we break compatibility.
As written in my alternate proposal at the end of my message above yours, inserting ORTS3DAligment in the .cvf file there is no more need for values 4, 5 and 6. ORTS3DAlignment would have values 1, 2 and 3, and within the code it would be used to assign a LabelAlignment to a new variable Alignment3D, which would be the one checked in the 3D cab code.

[Sharpe49]

@twpol Can you check if the changes are OK for you?

[twpol]

@twpol Can you check if the changes are OK for you?

The changes look much better now, thanks all

[Csantucci]

Nice that we arrived at a shared conclusion. Thanks.