Dear Fernando,
The implementation will be based on half-edge scheme. However by using Boost.Intrusive adapters, it would be possible for our algorithms to use the BGL representations as well.
When talking about the 2D we mainly talk about the combinatorial information, so I'll say its the topology (if this is what you mean by topology).
Thank you (and others), its really great to get this much interest from the community.
huseyin
Hey if you are interested, there is a library I explored before (www.openmesh.org) and of course I think CGAL has a half-edge (or maybe double-edge) mesh. I think that it would be good if you can at least model the BGL Concepts, so that the BGL algorithms can be applied to the mesh. There is a much more generic concept than half-edge (HE) meshes called a 'lath' mesh (http://graphics.idav.ucdavis.edu/publications/print_pub?pub_id=357). Unfortunately I only read about this (and several other papers) after learning the hard way that a HE mesh does not suit every purpose. This, or something like it, is important to me because in many scenarios a mesh is not always manifold all the time, especially if you wish to maintain the connectivity as you operate on it by adding and removing faces. A HE mesh can not adequately represent a non manifold mesh, such as would result when you deleted two non-adjacent triangles from a vertex and filled-in the gap between them with a single polygon for example. In fact that type of operation can be EXTREMELY tricky if I remember because the corners at a vertex on more than one hole have no ordering between them, and you have to carefully consider legitimate ways to shuffle the wedges (connected sets of corners) whenever a new cell is added in order to maintain the validity of the mesh, provided you wish to maintain the connectivity-data structure as faces are added and deleted. In the paper I linked-to above a 'lathe' is defined at each _corner_ rather than at each edge. They present a concept for representing connectivity that generalizes several other data structures (including HE), and they discuss issues related to how a lath representation impacts boundary traversal or non-manifold edges. What is awesome is that I think this same concept extends to 3-manifold meshes as well (but I don't know if the authors ever developed that). Even if you do not extend your mesh library to 3D, I hope that you think about how it would be done and make sure the library is flexible enough to grow in that direction. This is another paper, which actually deals with both 2D & 3D meshes, but it nicely describes the kinds of issues I hope can be dealt with (http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=882380) I gather from the boost discussions that nobody has yet even settled on a boost-approved point & vector concept or class (uBlas has c_vector, and gil has point2 but that is kind of internal to the library and not intended to be for general use). Would this library include those? John Femiani _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost