Full Bleed wrote: ↑Fri Apr 09, 2021 12:23 am
Sure there was.
...
Not sure where the resistance is coming from.
...
This most certainly would not be done without your "work around." You're just going to have to own this one.
I think perhaps we are talking at cross purposes here. The only thing I am resisting is misunderstanding. I guess it all depends on what you mean by "limitation" and "own". I disagree with the last point though, it most certainly could have been easily done by anyone, with virtually no code at all (like 2 lines MAX).
When I think "limitation", I think "the tool prevents you from doing so", not "kind of discourages you". If the tool had *actual* logic in place to prevent people from dropping either audio files or large binary files into the campaign (it doesn't), and I hacked my away around *that* - I would absolutely take responsibility for it, but I didn't do that.
Maptool allows you include arbitrary binary files in a campaign file, it allows you to play local sound files from a "file://" URI, it allows you to set a read only local file path accessible from macros (the FSD) and it allows you to get the asset tag of arbitrary assets with "getImage" (regardless of the name, which is semantics, not a limitation). As far as I see it - all I have done is push the boundaries of Maptool's inherent capabilities. I don't see the issue with that. If people don't want to use the JUH libraries, I'm not forcing them to. If the devs want to cripple their own product in response to me showing people how awesome it can be, I can't stop them. Would be sad though
Besides, weren't YOU the one encouraging me to ACTUALLY change the things you say are limitations? (e.g. changing the red X, adding import dialogs etc...)
Same thing with "own" - I think we're talking of different things. To me "own" means "caused and are responsible for". I will absolutely own the following:
-pointing out that Maptool allows you to include any asset you like
-pointing out you can get any asset tag with "getImage"
-pointing out you can use both to provide locally cached audio
-building a tool that uses the above to redress a shortcoming in Maptool
What I won't take responsibility for, is the fact that Maptool doesn't do anything to prevent you from dropping your entire life's photo album of images onto a campaign map and "blowing up your campaign file size". That was always possible and has literally nothing to do with me or JUH.
To me, it feels like I'm pointing out a pothole in the road, and you're telling me I that I must have caused it. I disagree, but hopefully that wasn't what you meant.
Full Bleed wrote: ↑Fri Apr 09, 2021 12:23 am
You needn't take it as a criticism.
I'm not, I'm just trying to be clear about what things I'm actually responsible for here.
Full Bleed wrote: ↑Fri Apr 09, 2021 12:23 am
But it's also pretty clear that using getImage this way was not intended. So while I don't want to see the ability go away, I think a more appropriately named and implemented function like getAsset (or getAudio) should be offered. The question is whether or not there is any additional functionality such functions should have.
I don't see being unintended as an indictment, more of a "bonus feature". It's not any more detrimental than anything else you can already do with other assets in Maptool, which is what matters in the end.
I agree though, a proper "getAsset" or "getAudio" method would be the correct way to go, and I would love it if it got implemented and made JUH obsolete. A simple "getAsset" that returned "asset://<md5>" for any asset would seem the simplest and most preferrable approach.
Full Bleed wrote: ↑Fri Apr 09, 2021 12:23 am
Not sure I fully agree with there not being "a single good reason"...
Don't forget the "why this should apply to audio and not visual assets" part! Everything you mention applies equally well to visual assets, but nobody seems concerned about people dropping their 2Tb photo album into a campaign, so worrying about people doing same with audio falls a bit flat on my ears.
I also find the idea that it's somehow the Maptool devs' responsibility to ensure that users can't "blow up their campaign files" to be patronizing and distasteful. It should not be the devs responsibility. If a group wants to play with a 2GB campaign file and they all have 500mb/s internet, who is anyone else to tell them their campaign file is "too big" and they shouldn't be allowed to do it?
I think we can trust users to not shoot themselves in the foot and keep their campaign file sizes reasonable, without imposing on them someone else's definition of what a "reasonable" campaign file size is.
"Joe's Ugly Hacks - Get 'em while their hot! Guaranteed ugliest hacks around or your money back!"