Hi folks,
I like to introduce my naming convention for my scenery development. This is - of cause - discussable, but it would be nice if we can agree on a naming and design convention, because it makes it much easier to integrate sceneries if they cover similar areas.
Let me show you how I do it:
Under the general scenery folder I define my area:
I have a documentation folder for readme and other stuff not used by aerofly.
elevation, images and places are the folders needed from aerofly to work.
Unter each of them I make sub directories defining the areas covered.
All of them starting with the type.
ele_ for elevation, img_ for the map images, apt_ for airport data, cul_ for independent cultivation areas.
After that the level of detail is coded: 09_ and the "name" of the area: 8b80_b880_
This is the unique identification.
For a faster identification I also add a name for this area.
Inside the elevation folder elevation files of this area are included:
ele_09_8a00_a980_prague\maph_11_8a60_a9c0.tth
Inside the images folder all ortho files:
img_09_8a00_a980_prague\map_12_8a00_a9b0.ttc
Inside the airport folders the airport data are included:
If it is just a basic tsc file;
apt_09_8a00_a980_prague\LKRO-Roudnice.tsc
If you have a bigger airport with textures and stuff make a subdirectory for it.
Inside the cultivation folder put the building_textures folder, the cul_11_8bc0_a8a0.tsc and the cul_11_8bc0_a8c0.toc.
Use the same tile system like maps and elevation. In this case you don't need to find out what exact boundaries a foreign scenery use.If the sizes are the same you can deactivate the area you don't want.
My convention is: the biggest size if the toc files is the highest level of elevation detail. So if I compile elevation from 9 to 11 my size for cultivation would be 11, to avoid flying buildings.
What do you think?