I think the best would be if only a moderator could add such a tag after a through validation process, but that would result in an extremely huge workload for the moderators.
It's actually easier than you think. Any newly created tags (so created by simply adding them on a submission) are breifly reviewed. If they're effectively nonsense or don't contribute to helping people search for assets, they are deleted. Examples include "My cool game", "this sux but its free", "Art" (everything is art here), "Music" (we have searchable categories. no need to clutter it with category tags), "CC0" or "Public Domain" (again, we have license categories already) So long as I know why a new tag like "LPC-SX" or whatever is added, I make sure it isn't marked as pointless. If other people start adding random tags like "LPC-454885" with no real comformity, they'll get cleaned up.
sorry for the joke I did not want to offend you in any way.
Oh, pah! You can ignore my Klingon yelling. I assumed you meant that as a light-hearted joke and my response was intended in the same spirit. I wasn't offended at all, just joking back. :)
because providing the full list would equal to providing the final specification, wouldn't it?
Surely not. If someone asks you what a book is about, you don't recite the entire book to them, do you? A full list of things you want included doesn't need to include the full details of each item on that list. That being said, your specific examples all make sense and are starting to form a more complete picture. Thanks.
If you're lucky, then you can find this image buried deep down in the forum,
That animation guide is indeed buried in the forum, but what does that guide show that the animation base character guide in the LPC style guide not show? I'm NOT saying "you don't need that other guide", I am trying to understand the gaps that need to be filled.
all the things that the current style guide lacks.
The things it lacks include the complete works of Shakespear, the French Declaration of Independence, and my dog. For wanting to make the specification more specific, the end of this sentence is ironically vague. I want to know what else you feel the current guide lacks. However, I agree with all your suggestions preceeding it. :)
I'm after a new tag, to mark collections that fulfill the requirements of a more strict LPC specification
Oh, ok. That makes sense.
It looks like you're not a sci-fi person, and you haven't heard of Star Trek :-)
CHOLEGH! I know every episode by heart! but "NG" is not ubiquitously applied to situations like this to warrant recognition. For example, if I said FRoA #208, you wouldn't just know what that is without context, hahahah! Regardless, I'd recommend something that implies a different standard, not a new version of the old standard. LPC-S1 or something.
Going off of the original LPC style guide, what sort of additions would be made? I realize expected perspective, angle of light, drop shadows, palette, and animations were mentioned, but those are already mentioned in the LPC style guide. I assume you're saying it is missing more specifics of those features, yes?
what does LPC-NG stand for? Liberated Pixel Cup N____? G____?
There cannot be restrictions imposed on what others are allowed to do with LPC assets under any fork. You may encourage buy-in and agreement to follow a stricter set of guidelines, though. You can create a ("yet another") curated collection of LPC assets and only admit the content that meets certain specifictaions as well, but you wouldn't be able to stop anyone from making derivatives that don't follow those specifications and you wouldn't be able to stop such derivatives from being widely adopted if the community happened to prefer them. This is a bit of the XKCD Standards conundrum:
I don't understand how a LPC-specific license would help the issues outlined. CC-BY-SA, OGA-BY, and GPL (the most common licenses for LPC content) already allow you to copy-paste a list of all-LPC-contributors-ever* for attribution. The Universal character generator already does this under the terms of these licenses; you can either attribute every contributor who has added to the generator's content, or just the specific contributors who made the components of the character you've made. How would a new license allow you to credit authors more easily?
*Such a list is always growing. There could not be a static place to copy the attribution from. It would have to be dynamic and curated to include new authors as they contribute content.
@STANKwild: Ogg Vorbis. It's like an mp3, but better. Both because it doesn't have the silent gap at the start and because it isn't mired in patents, so you don't have to pay royalties to use/make codecs for it. There are some other technological improvements as well, but those are the most notable ones IMHO. Nearly all modern game engines support Ogg Vorbis. Many moreso than mp3's for the patent reason I listed.
@sirsnowy7: A grid who's dimensions are some exponent of 2: like 32x32 (2⁵ by 2⁵) or 512x1024 (2⁹ by 2¹⁰). Such dimensions make it easier for GPUs to calculate textures, polygons, and sprites.
See also https://opengameart.org/forumtopic/curated-lpc-collection-project
P.S.
It's actually easier than you think. Any newly created tags (so created by simply adding them on a submission) are breifly reviewed. If they're effectively nonsense or don't contribute to helping people search for assets, they are deleted. Examples include "My cool game", "this sux but its free", "Art" (everything is art here), "Music" (we have searchable categories. no need to clutter it with category tags), "CC0" or "Public Domain" (again, we have license categories already) So long as I know why a new tag like "LPC-SX" or whatever is added, I make sure it isn't marked as pointless. If other people start adding random tags like "LPC-454885" with no real comformity, they'll get cleaned up.
Oh, pah! You can ignore my Klingon yelling. I assumed you meant that as a light-hearted joke and my response was intended in the same spirit. I wasn't offended at all, just joking back. :)
Surely not. If someone asks you what a book is about, you don't recite the entire book to them, do you? A full list of things you want included doesn't need to include the full details of each item on that list. That being said, your specific examples all make sense and are starting to form a more complete picture. Thanks.
That animation guide is indeed buried in the forum, but what does that guide show that the animation base character guide in the LPC style guide not show? I'm NOT saying "you don't need that other guide", I am trying to understand the gaps that need to be filled.
The things it lacks include the complete works of Shakespear, the French Declaration of Independence, and my dog. For wanting to make the specification more specific, the end of this sentence is ironically vague. I want to know what else you feel the current guide lacks. However, I agree with all your suggestions preceeding it. :)
Oh, ok. That makes sense.
CHOLEGH! I know every episode by heart! but "NG" is not ubiquitously applied to situations like this to warrant recognition. For example, if I said FRoA #208, you wouldn't just know what that is without context, hahahah! Regardless, I'd recommend something that implies a different standard, not a new version of the old standard. LPC-S1 or something.
Thanks. That answers my questions. :)
Going off of the original LPC style guide, what sort of additions would be made? I realize expected perspective, angle of light, drop shadows, palette, and animations were mentioned, but those are already mentioned in the LPC style guide. I assume you're saying it is missing more specifics of those features, yes?
what does LPC-NG stand for? Liberated Pixel Cup N____? G____?
There cannot be restrictions imposed on what others are allowed to do with LPC assets under any fork. You may encourage buy-in and agreement to follow a stricter set of guidelines, though. You can create a ("yet another") curated collection of LPC assets and only admit the content that meets certain specifictaions as well, but you wouldn't be able to stop anyone from making derivatives that don't follow those specifications and you wouldn't be able to stop such derivatives from being widely adopted if the community happened to prefer them. This is a bit of the XKCD Standards conundrum:
I don't understand how a LPC-specific license would help the issues outlined. CC-BY-SA, OGA-BY, and GPL (the most common licenses for LPC content) already allow you to copy-paste a list of all-LPC-contributors-ever* for attribution. The Universal character generator already does this under the terms of these licenses; you can either attribute every contributor who has added to the generator's content, or just the specific contributors who made the components of the character you've made. How would a new license allow you to credit authors more easily?
*Such a list is always growing. There could not be a static place to copy the attribution from. It would have to be dynamic and curated to include new authors as they contribute content.
Congratulations ElizaWy and thanks to all who participated!
Medals awarded.
Are you asking how to incorporate the file into your game code? Or are you asking what is the proper way to adhere to the license requirements?
@STANKwild: Ogg Vorbis. It's like an mp3, but better. Both because it doesn't have the silent gap at the start and because it isn't mired in patents, so you don't have to pay royalties to use/make codecs for it. There are some other technological improvements as well, but those are the most notable ones IMHO. Nearly all modern game engines support Ogg Vorbis. Many moreso than mp3's for the patent reason I listed.
@sirsnowy7: A grid who's dimensions are some exponent of 2: like 32x32 (2⁵ by 2⁵) or 512x1024 (2⁹ by 2¹⁰). Such dimensions make it easier for GPUs to calculate textures, polygons, and sprites.
Nice. Sounds great!
Pages