Not only that but we could get people and companies like iRobot to make their own contributions if there were a straightforward facility for doing it. It's like free advertising.
 
I think separation of concerns is definitely the way to go. It makes it easier to use different subsystems interchangeably, to work on them independently, to consider new technologies in the future, etc. By "hard-wiring" them together we remove a lot of options down the line and with respect to the work we would be doing today.....unless I misunderstood the concept.
 
You also bring up another good point in this thread. "Robotics is a field without
standard hardware..." Should we consider dipping our toe in the waters of standards or is that outside the scope of this project? If it is outside the scope, should we be considering some of the offerings that are emerging that I can't remember the names of but I do recall that Microsoft recently mentioned one and I attended a lecture by a competitive military robotics team that mentioned one they are using.

 
On 8/9/06, Luis Manso <luis.manso@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello

> As Luis pointed out, Gazebo is lacking an easy way to construct a
> world or a model. Here is what I envision. A new GUI should be created
> that allows a user to place models into the environment. The GUI
> should save a world file, allow the user to run the simulation, and
> make changes as necessary. This will require some work, potentially
> from a few people. If one or more people want to tackle this, then we
> need to discuss a few things:
>    1) What gui toolkit is preferable?
>    2) Should we use opal? This is an important question, it seems like
> an very interesting project, and they already have a physics editor in
> development. Here is a link to the website:
> http://ox.slug.louisville.edu/~o0lozi01/opal_wiki/index.php/Main_Page

In my honest opinion I think that we should think about how the model
creation process should be done. Placing models into the environment
is a secondary topic.

>    3) Should this app be separate from the main simulator, or
> integrated (pause the simulation and you can start editing things)?

I think a separate app should be sufficient by now. The integrated
solution would be better, but I think it's not a needed feature.

> There is always room for more sensors and models. Such as a touch
> sensor, someone can work on a light sensor, how about a model of the
> roomba.

Having an easy way to create new models people would contribute with
they creations, without it, people doesn't use to make new models.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Playerstage-gazebo mailing list
Playerstage-gazebo@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/playerstage-gazebo