Animation priorities?

Joe Etten jetten at gmail.com
Tue Jan 8 12:28:03 PST 2008


Oh this would be a very wonderful addition to the llStartAnimation()
function. I'd vote it up so long as it just ignored the baked setting.
However, with so many animated objects out there, I am sure it would cause
havoc.

On Jan 8, 2008 3:01 PM, Richard Nelson <richard at lindenlab.com> wrote:

>
> We've wanted a way to open existing animations and modify the attributes
> but, as mentioned, this would result in creating a new asset every time a
> change is committed.  I think a more scalable approach would be to allow
> the triggering of animations at priorities specified via LSL.
>
> llStartAnimation("anim", HIGH_PRIORITY);
>
> I think it's important that animations still keep an intrinsic priority,
> but this would be a simple way to add the flexibility you want.
>
> R.
>
> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 16:13:57 -0700, Craig Berry <cberry at cine.net> wrote:
>
> > I've noticed that if you have a base animation override package
> > attached, so that your walk, stand, sit, etc. are customized, it's
> > unpredictable whether an animation run by some other attachment will
> > work or not.  Usually it's clear which one should have a higher
> > priority than the other, but there doesn't seem to be a way to set
> > this.  Am I missing something?
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
> _______________________________________________
> Click here to unsubscribe or manage your list subscription:
> https://lists.secondlife.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/secondlifescripters
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/secondlifescripters/attachments/20080108/7c3389dc/attachment.htm


More information about the secondlifescripters mailing list