You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Not sure how I personally feel about just adding frames / visuals / collision without inertias. (if you're adding new collisions via SDFormat, they should be real and physical?)
Not sure how I feel about this when the adding element will have scoped names.
So thinking about this, my gut says we punt for now on SDFormat 1.8.
EricCousineau-TRI
changed the title
SDFormat 1.8: Should permit nesting models without links (e.g. defining frames / visuals / collision only)?
Should permit nesting models without links (e.g. defining frames / visuals / collision only)?
Aug 13, 2020
In SDFormat 1.7, we admit models with no links iff they are
//static=true
, and the canonical link for those models are attached to the world:http://sdformat.org/tutorials?tut=pose_frame_semantics_proposal&cat=pose_semantics_docs-1-implicit-frame-defined-by-model-pose-attached-to-canonical-link
However, @azeey pointed out that we may want similar behavior for nested models:
gazebosim/sdf_tutorials#34 (review)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: