I think this should be a non issue. Nothing is broken... changing the image names and the arches is usless busy work.... just a waste. --- Mark Wedel < mwedel at sonic.net > wrote: > Todd Mitchell wrote: > > Not sure I am following - I am proposing using "x" > for single images > > greater than a single tile in size. Images that > are a single tile would > > still use the "1" as would the first tile in a > large image which has not > > been merged. Since the first digit was only to > denote the tile order > > using x will distinguish multi-tile images from > single tile images. > > My point was that at some level, changing the > naming to distinguish large > (merged) images for other single images is > inconsistent. > > that is to say, right now, I think there are some > large (merged) images that > are currently in the .111, .112, etc format. Those > can all get renamed I > suppose, but just a note. > > But because of that, having the first digit be a > '1' for large images isn't > necessary incorrect - it is the first part of the > image - it just happens to be > a large image. > > I also have the concern about sort of large > images. For example, with the > large image support, you could make something like > an ogre that is 40 pixels > high, and it will be drawn properly (ignoring > existing drawing errors). Should > that have an 'x' or '1' for the first tile? That's > just a matter of > clarification of when should an x be used instead of > 1. > > > _______________________________________________ > crossfire mailing list > crossfire at metalforge.org > http://mailman.metalforge.org/mailman/listinfo/crossfire > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com