THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED
On 26/10/2005 at 20:35, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Cinema 4D Version: 8.503
Platform: Windows ; Mac ; Mac OSX ;
Language(s) : C++ ;
Please tell me that the following statement is false:
If a plugin tag has no TAG_VISIBLE flag, it is not only hidden in the Object Manager (which is what I need to keep the interface from crawling with possibly hundreds of tags per object) but also in the Timeline so that you cannot edit the tracks on the hidden plugin tag.
There is another plugin tag, visible, which collects these and provides an interface but it cannot be used for storing the tracks since GetDDescription() may be adding/removing tags over time. This voids any correlation between the ID set in this tag and the track to which it is supposed to point. I've tried and it results in a mess!
My question, I suppose, is why does hiding the tag (once and for all even) exclude seeing it in other managers such as the Timeline and F-Curve windows?
On 27/10/2005 at 01:46, xxxxxxxx wrote:
TAG_VISIBLE will hide the tags from the timeline as well. If you want to separate the tracks from the data you'll have to somehow solve the correlation question.
On 14/11/2005 at 00:08, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Mikael, any suggestions?
The problem is threefold:
1. Tags may be added or deleted.
2. There are settings in the 'collector' tag which determine which types of tags are displayed (descriptions added or not).
3. The tags are grouped by 'body part' (DescLevel group) under the collector tag. ETA: Notable because this means that addition is not necessarily appending, but ends up being more of an insertion.
Since the only tie between the description in the collector tag and the relevant track is the 'index', whenever GetDDescription() is called and any of those three items above vary, the tracks may no longer refer to the same description item - and I don't know of any way to reassign them offhand - it appears to be a strictly linear association.
Any words of wisdom?
On 15/11/2005 at 16:54, xxxxxxxx wrote:
You can disregard this, Mikael.
What I found is that the Object Manager interface only goes to hell if the plugin icon images aren't 24x24 (64x64 is what I was using). So instead of correcting once for the entire plugin, it is obviously referencing the image file and sizing it for every single tag in the OM! Once I change the image size to 24x24, the interface now hums along even with the thousand and one tags...