A plea to scenery developers...

[MM 426]

A plea to scenery developers.It would be very helpful if scenery developers would adopt a convention for naming their *.bgl files. In particular, two sorts of files need simple identification: Airport Facility (AFCAD) files and Landclass/Waterclass files.Might it be possible for scenery developers to name the files by a convention as simple as:For Airport Facility definitions (using AFCAD 2.xx):AF2_*.bgl or, better, AF2_ICAO_Developer Name.bgl (where "ICAO" is the ICAO code for the airport and "Developer Name" is the developer's name).And for Landclass and Waterclass files:LC_*.bglWC_*.bglor, better, LC_ICAO_Developer Name.bgl (where "ICAO" is the ICAO code for the airport and "Developer Name" is the developer's name).The reason for this might seem obvious. Most users will want to be able to maintain some control over the installation of AFCAD files and Landclass files. The first need is more common. Users want to be able to identify instances of multiple AFCAD files or may want to substitute for (or customize) the developer's included AFCAD file. If the scenery files in a scenery have non-descriptive names, then the user will be asked to do some serious sleuthing.Second, the Landclass files may also want special attention from users. In particular, knowing the location of Landclass files can sometimes help work out the cause of memory leaks.Additional types of files might also benefit from a naming convention. For example, many developers use a separate file called something like ICAO_Static.bgl to indicate static aircraft/vehicle scenery files. (Users of dense AI typically want to eliminate static aircraft, while those not using AI will want to keep them.) There are likely other conventions that would be useful.In general, beyond any specifics, the community will be better off if we all can adopt a set of naming conventions that make everything as transparent as possible. These names (AF2_*.bgl and LC_*.bgl) are a commonly used naming pattern already. I'm only asking that developers be more self-conscious about those conventions and make an effort to be as open with the community as possible.What do you think?Best,Mike MacKuen(BTW. I'm raising this issue only because two very-well-respected authors of a excellent scenery additions have recently embedded the AFCAD files in their scenery bgls in such a way that makes it difficult for the user to handle.)

[Guest]

Yes, conventions are always nice. I too think it would be easier but of course with thousands of different modelers there could be as many different conventions employed. Look at all the ways there are to just install an add-on. Seems that AFCADS are fairly standard in the naming conventions.Also, some authors may not prefer that simmers go in and mess with their work (even though no one else would ever see it). And I think there is a program out there that creates airport scenery and automatically creates the AFCAD which makes it hard to separate the two. I tried editiing one and would keep losing the scenery after I changed a few parking assignments.

[Shaka 2]

This is pretty much happening already, at least with the examples you gave.Scenery created with AFCAD2 already have a standard convention, at least when saved with the default filename. So, unless the designer goes out of his way to change this name, it is easily recognisable to the user.As for Landclass and Waterclass files, the author should make these obvious since they should not be kept in the same folder as the other BGL files (assuming there is a corresponding texture folder). Most designers will make a point of mentioning this in the docs, and will usually list the files in question, as well as giving them obvious names.I think that if there were to be a more rigid convention, like all landclass files have to start with "LC_" then most designers would probably just ignore it anyway.Finally, the other BGL files sometimes need to be cryptically named in order to prevent simmers from messing around, as was pointed out. I had a guy email me telling me that my AFCAD2 file was screwed up, and that he wasn't able to edit it. Funny thing is, I had never made an AFCAD2 file for this particular scenery, although I had made a AFD file (by hand, using the SDK) which included the airport data. This guy wouldn't drop it, and kept bugging me about what an AFCAD-expert he was, and how I just fix the "bug" in my scenery. He just didn't get it, and kept on trying to fool around with stuff that he didn't understand. After that, I made a point of hiding certain stuff so that the "experts" wouldn't try to fool around with it anymore. Anther reason I have for using non-standard filenames is that some of the library objects and textures I use are copyrighted by someone else. Although I have obtained the rights to use them in my scenery, I do not have the right to let you use them in your scenery. So, I take reasonable step to "hide" these objects in with the rest of the scenery items so that the average scenery designer can't hijack my objects.So, sometimes it's good to make the names obvious, and sometimes it isn't.- Martin

[ShezA 176]

Well if you are talking about PSP the scenery was developed in four different programs (AFW, SGX, GMAX, G2K4). AFCAD was never used because SGX has the ability to do the entire AI traffic stuff within its own engine. If you want to manipulate the AFCAD then open KPSPMain.bgl and do your thing. Just save it as AF2_PSP.bgl.I agree maybe the G2K4 file should have been named LC*. Next time maybe though the next one is back to photoreal...RegardsShez

[LuisFelizTirado 33]

Hello Mike,Thanks for these comments. All too often, scenery files are named so cryptically that they are illegible to all but the designer. It would certainly help if everyone gave long descriptive names to their files. Particularly when one tries to clean out the default scenery folders and can no longer remember what each file does.It would also be helpful if a list of all files included in a scenery package was provided in the zip file.Nonetheless, please note that you, and every user of scenery files, can easily and safely change the names of the bgl files. The names themselves are not used by the FS scenery engine, and are simply descriptive.So, if you don't understand LC54gh9x.bgl, just rename it to Swiss_Land_Class_by_Bidermann_2004.bgl without any problem at all. You are probably limited to 256 characters, but that should be ample.Best regards.Luis

[Shaka 2]

>Thanks for these comments. All too often, scenery files are>named so cryptically that they are illegible to all but the>designer. It would certainly help if everyone gave long>descriptive names to their files. Particularly when one tries>to clean out the default scenery folders and can no longer>remember what each file does.I've never been a big fan of installing scenery to the default folders. I realise that this is easier for the user, but it can create problems when he wants to uninstall the scenery. I occaisionally get complaints about problems with my scenery, and the "problem" is that they have installed my scenery over another scenery which together is causing problems. Of course, there was no way to keep track of the different installations because they were installed to a default folder.>It would also be helpful if a list of all files included in a>scenery package was provided in the zip file.This is the best idea I've heard in a long time, and I will adopt it. Naturally, this would make it easier to uninstall scenery files if the user put them in a default folder. You've made a very compelling reason here.>Nonetheless, please note that you, and every user of scenery>files, can easily and safely change the names of the bgl>files. The names themselves are not used by the FS scenery>engine, and are simply descriptive.This is precisely what I do with Landclass and mesh files which I like to keep seperate from "regular" scenery. It makes it easy to find these files if they become superceded. I suppose that if somebody wanted to, they could rename all the scenery files that way and then install them to a common, default folder, and then pick them out easily if they wanted to uninstall them.So, maybe designers like me can compromise a little and make the BGL more obviously tied to a particular scenery, but still keep their purposes hidden if we don't want users messing around. I'll try this on my next scenery:VTBD2004_by_Martin_1.bglVTBD2004_by_Martin_2.bglVTBD2004_by_Martin_AFCAD2.bglVTBD2004_by_Martin_landclass.bgletc.I'm not so sure about textures though, since sometimes they are borrowed from other projects, or they have been downloaded as part of a ready-made object. It might be a lot of work to go back and edit every material in every object to use the same naming scheme for textures. Maybe this isn't as big of an issue though, and as long as we have a list like you described above, this won't be a huge problem anyway.- Martin