Re: Standard Brush Format

Jonathan Mavor (
Thu, 27 Jun 1996 19:04:08 -0700

Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 19:04:08 -0700
Message-Id: <>
From: Jonathan Mavor <>
Subject: Re: Standard Brush Format

At 07:23 PM 6/27/96 -0500, you wrote:
>Matt Houser wrote:


> First, the brush files would be syntactically identical to the map files --
>the same parsing would work for both. Secondly, using entity-style grouping
>would allow for many super-brushes to be stored in a single brush file, so
>you could have a "stairs.bsh" file which could contian a normal staircase, a
>spiral staircase, and perhaps many other kinds of stair templates in a single
>place. Finally, using an entity-based format would allow brush templates to
>have default entity classes assigned to them. Say you have a "doors.bsh"
>file with various kinds of doors in it with their classnames already set to
>the appropriate kind of door class.

I think that this is probably a good idea. I'm going to write
some utils in my editor to generate stuff like stairs but for
doors, door frames and weird complex shapes having a standard format
would be very good. And since the map format already exists with
entities in place then this is even better. As a matter of fact,
we should be able to define a piece of quake-c code to go with the
entity (or at least an example). BTW can bsp entities be rotated???