We never resolved the ambiguity of where to start printing slices. Currently we receive the following schema:
{
"thickness": 0.19,
"offset": 1,
"offset2": 0,
"offsetDepth": 2,
"lines": [],
"model": [null,null,null,[
{
"is_hole": false,
"origin_face_normals": [],
"children": [{}]
}, {}], []]
I'd like to suggest we change to the following:
{
"offset": 1,
"offset2": 0,
"offsetDepth": 2,
"lines": [],
"model": [null,null,null,
{
"height": 0.0000001,
"polygons":[{
"is_hole": false,
"origin_face_normals": [],
"children": [{}]
}, {}]
}
The advantage to this is that we can parse the height unambiguously and know whether or not we are getting an epsilon slice we cannot print.
Of course this breaks backwards compatibility, but I think that is something we can deal with.
CC: @dmtaub @brianxu @dreammaker @jminardi
We never resolved the ambiguity of where to start printing slices. Currently we receive the following schema:
{ "thickness": 0.19, "offset": 1, "offset2": 0, "offsetDepth": 2, "lines": [], "model": [null,null,null,[ { "is_hole": false, "origin_face_normals": [], "children": [{}] }, {}], []]I'd like to suggest we change to the following:
{ "offset": 1, "offset2": 0, "offsetDepth": 2, "lines": [], "model": [null,null,null, { "height": 0.0000001, "polygons":[{ "is_hole": false, "origin_face_normals": [], "children": [{}] }, {}] }The advantage to this is that we can parse the height unambiguously and know whether or not we are getting an epsilon slice we cannot print.
Of course this breaks backwards compatibility, but I think that is something we can deal with.
CC: @dmtaub @brianxu @dreammaker @jminardi