Added the 5 IR @ Home Autonomous Challenges #200
Conversation
|
This could be confusing if the paths change in the future. What do you think about including a general 2021 at home image with all the points on it (like there is at the start of the game manual)? |
|
If the paths change in the future? When do you think the paths will change? Why would they change? Seems like a low likelyhood of change and if they did why wouldn't we just update this? I actually started with a single general image that looked like the initial field setup at the top of page 16 and found it hard to use. |
|
Good point. How about we just add the year to the front of each image ( |
|
Okay I like that as it does improve consistency with the other things that are already there. |
|
The coordinates in the pictures do not match Pathweaver coordinates (but do match the coordinates for WPILib Trajectories after export). Not sure if that will be confusing. |
|
I am not sure what you mean. Are you talking about the markings in ft on the outside of the pictures? Or are you talking about how PathWeaver goes 0,-27 in the Y direction (but is okay after export) if the latter then that is a PathWeaver thing and not related to this PR |
|
Y=0 in pathweaver is upper left and lower left is y=-15. In the picture y=0 is lower left and upper left is y=15. |
|
Interesting is that something to do with the picture or how / why does that happen? |
|
I'm talking about the coordinates built into the pictures.
|
|
I understand now better thank you. It didn't really confuse me as I guess I didn't use the waypoint X and Y values except to tune them relative to each other (and other X and Y) and never place a point with just X and Y. I might be able to Paint.net some different labels if you think it is essential. If we do that however I would probably want to convert to meters as I think that is what most people are using in PathWeaver? That would break the nice pretty divisions. Not sure what is best. |
|
My recommendation would be to just remove the coordinates in the image entirely (e.g. just leave the "field" portion). |
|
Anyone else have thoughts / input? If we get consensus I can do that |
|
Yes, we have consensus on the team for that approach. |
|
I think removing the coordinates is better then having bad coordinates and is consistent with the other field images. |
|
By cropping so close, a waypoint in the corner of the field doesn't get fully shown. This might not be a problem except that the default path has one. You can still select it, however, if someone tries. |
|
To me it seems like a PathWeaver issue but I guess I could crop it with some amount of border and resize the field if that is what the team wants. How much border if that is what we want? |
|
It's actually an issue in Field2d as well. Maybe 10-20 pixels of border? |
|
I added a 20 pixel border hope that looks good to everyone |
Closes #199