[API Review] FX 8 3D API

[Chien Yang]

Just a quick update. Kevin, Richard and I have an offline discussion on 
grouping of new 3D classes. After talking through the pros and cons 
possible grouping approaches. We agreed to collapse the packages as 
follows:

    move all (9) classes from javafx.scene.shape3d ==> javafx.scene.shape
    move all (2) classes from javafx.scene.material ==> javafx.scene.paint
    move all (3) classes from javafx.scene.light ==> javafx.scene

and also change LOD helper, Node.areaInScene, a read only property to a 
compute method. I will update the JIRA issue and generate a new API docs 
for approval tomorrow.

- Chien

On 2/6/2013 1:10 PM, Chien Yang wrote:
> I don't foresee the need to add dozens, but an additional of 10 
> classes might be a reasonable expectation. :-)
>
> - Chien
>
> On 2/6/2013 12:53 PM, Richard Bair wrote:
>> I would hope we're going to support user defined shaders. That 
>> doesn't mean some additional materials aren't a good idea. But we're 
>> not talking about dozens of additional classes, right?
>>
>> On Feb 6, 2013, at 12:48 PM, Chien Yang <chien.yang at oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Don't exactly know at this point, but we did talk about adding 
>>> high-order surfaces and additional light types at one point.  We 
>>> will very likely need to support more material types if we want to 
>>> hold the line of not supporting user defined shader.
>>>
>>> - Chien
>>>
>>> On 2/6/2013 11:22 AM, Richard Bair wrote:
>>>> How much?
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 6, 2013, at 11:21 AM, Chien Yang <chien.yang at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Richard,
>>>>>
>>>>>      The number of classes in shape3d, light and material packages 
>>>>> will certainly grow in future releases too as we add more features.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Chien
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2/6/2013 10:55 AM, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
>>>>>> They could all be put in the shape3d package, but it seems 
>>>>>> inconsistent with 2D packages: shape, paint effect, etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- Kevin
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Richard Bair wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Chien,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> javafx.scene.light.LightBase (abstract)
>>>>>>>>     javafx.scene.material.Material (abstract)
>>>>>>> I'm not jazzed about creating two new packages here. It seems 
>>>>>>> like these things should all be grouped in the same place as 
>>>>>>> camera, or shape3d. Ideas?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Methods and Properties added to Node
>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> LOD helper property:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> /**
>>>>>>>> * A read only property that stores the computed area of this
>>>>>>>> * {@code Node} projected onto the physical screen in pixel unit.
>>>>>>>> */
>>>>>>>> public final double getAreaInScreen()
>>>>>>>> public final javafx.beans.property.ReadOnlyDoubleProperty 
>>>>>>>> areaInScreenProperty()
>>>>>>> Can this be efficiently implemented? We ripped out boundsInScene 
>>>>>>> because it was impossible to get it fast enough. Why would this 
>>>>>>> be any different?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The rest looks good.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Richard
>