What heresy is this?yorik wrote: ↑Fri May 26, 2023 9:27 am - Maybe writing unit tests for Arch and FEM that test material support would be handy here so we can detect incompatibility issues early. For Arch there is one already: https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/blob ... ch.py#L399 but we might add a simpler one. For FEM I'm not sure
Yes. Regression testing will be vital.
I'm already thinking along the same lines. The tree would definitely be useful as a widget if not a full mini editor. Even for my own stuff I need a combination of material properties (either Shear modulus or Young's Modulus and poisson ratio), so perhaps a filtering function. Easier in an API than a UI, but potential performance issues either way.yorik wrote: ↑Fri May 26, 2023 9:27 am - Think of the possibility for workbenches to implement some sort of "micro-editor". Some workbenches might want to work with only a few material parameters, and will not want to use the full-fledged material editor. Maybe you could design your UI code in a way that some parts of it could be reused by others (I'm thinking for example, of the materials tree)
Good idea. Yaml can handle binary data and links are links.yorik wrote: ↑Fri May 26, 2023 9:27 am - Some external resources might be needed, like texture images, or hatch patterns. These might be a simple file path, or an URL, but I imagine these could also be embedded, so we have a self-contained material. The ability to embed any kind of data could also be useful for the complex cases you described, I imagine a whole table or diagram or formula could be embedded too.