MantisBT - Open CASCADE
View Issue Details
0028378Open CASCADE[OCCT] OCCT:Documentationpublic2017-01-20 18:552020-09-11 15:42
aml 
msv 
normalminor 
newopen 
[OCCT] 7.1.0 
[OCCT] 7.6.0* 
0028378: Documentation - Add information about binary brep
OCCT can operate with two different formats:

1) Classic text-based format
2) Modern binary-based format

Our documentation does not contain any mention of the binary format. I propose to add the following sections to the "user guide \ BRep format" document:

1) Section about formats itself (their differences and purposes)
2) Section about preferable extensions. It is time to define different extensions for each format. Such separation is widely used in other kernels (X_T / X_B, sat / sab)

"Technical Overview \ Draw Test Harness" should be extended by the "binsave" and "binrestore" commands.
N/A
No tags attached.
Issue History
2017-01-20 18:55amlNew Issue
2017-01-20 18:55amlAssigned To => msv
2017-01-20 19:12msvNote Added: 0062875
2017-01-20 19:28amlNote Added: 0062877
2017-01-20 19:30amlNote Edited: 0062877bug_revision_view_page.php?bugnote_id=62877#r15891
2017-05-19 15:36abvTarget Version7.3.0 => 7.2.0
2017-07-20 12:06msvTarget Version7.2.0 => 7.3.0
2018-03-24 10:31abvTarget Version7.3.0 => 7.4.0
2019-06-13 14:01kgvSummaryAdd information about binary brep => Documentation - Add information about binary brep
2019-08-13 10:53msvTarget Version7.4.0 => 7.5.0
2020-09-11 15:42utverdovTarget Version7.5.0 => 7.6.0*

Notes
(0062875)
msv   
2017-01-20 19:12   
The methods for reading/writing binary BRep files are documented here:
https://dev.opencascade.org/doc/overview/html/occt_user_guides__modeling_data.html#occt_modat_5_6 [^]
(0062877)
aml   
2017-01-20 19:28   
(edited on: 2017-01-20 19:30)
This section highlights binary files from programmer point view. What about user point of view? What about conventions or extensions? For example, ".brep" extension is mentioned in scope of the "BRep format" article. So, I think that issue is still relevant.

From my point of view "Storage of shapes" should be revised too.