Talk:Myst RLST resources - Revision history

Clone2727: add comment (and organize)

2008-09-05T19:24:20Z

add comment (and organize)

TitoDalCanton at 09:10, 5 September 2008

2008-09-05T09:10:02Z

TitoDalCanton at 09:09, 5 September 2008

2008-09-05T09:09:16Z

Clone2727: about indices...

2008-09-04T19:22:57Z

about indices...

New page

Why are the indices (ID's) zero-based? They make much more sense the way they were with the actual ID found in the files. -[[User:Clone2727|Clone2727]] 21:22, 4 September 2008 (CEST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:24, 5 September 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Why are the indices (ID's) zero-based? They make much more sense the way they were with the actual ID found in the files. -[[User:Clone2727\|Clone2727]] 21:22, 4 September 2008 (CEST)		Why are the indices (ID's) zero-based? They make much more sense the way they were with the actual ID found in the files. -[[User:Clone2727\|Clone2727]] 21:22, 4 September 2008 (CEST)

−	I don't actually understand what those "indexes" are. Are they resource IDs? I see different IDs in my Mohawk files (2002, 2004... in stone.dat). Maybe they are indexes in the sense of the Mohawk format? If this is the case, please use resources IDs instead, that's what is meant to be used. -[[User:TitoDalCanton\|TitoDalCanton]]	+	:I don't actually understand what those "indexes" are. Are they resource IDs? I see different IDs in my Mohawk files (2002, 2004... in stone.dat). Maybe they are indexes in the sense of the Mohawk format? If this is the case, please use resources IDs instead, that's what is meant to be used. -[[User:TitoDalCanton\|TitoDalCanton]]
		+
		+	::I used the resource ID found in the resource table. -[[User:Clone2727\|Clone2727]] 21:24, 5 September 2008 (CEST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:10, 5 September 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Why are the indices (ID's) zero-based? They make much more sense the way they were with the actual ID found in the files. -[[User:Clone2727\|Clone2727]] 21:22, 4 September 2008 (CEST)		Why are the indices (ID's) zero-based? They make much more sense the way they were with the actual ID found in the files. -[[User:Clone2727\|Clone2727]] 21:22, 4 September 2008 (CEST)

−	I don't actually understand what those "indexes" are. Are they resource IDs? I see different IDs in my Mohawk files (2002, 2004... in stone.dat). Maybe they are indexes in the sense of the Mohawk format? If this is the case, please use resources IDs instead, that's what is meant to be used.	+	I don't actually understand what those "indexes" are. Are they resource IDs? I see different IDs in my Mohawk files (2002, 2004... in stone.dat). Maybe they are indexes in the sense of the Mohawk format? If this is the case, please use resources IDs instead, that's what is meant to be used. -[[User:TitoDalCanton\|TitoDalCanton]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:09, 5 September 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Why are the indices (ID's) zero-based? They make much more sense the way they were with the actual ID found in the files. -[[User:Clone2727\|Clone2727]] 21:22, 4 September 2008 (CEST)		Why are the indices (ID's) zero-based? They make much more sense the way they were with the actual ID found in the files. -[[User:Clone2727\|Clone2727]] 21:22, 4 September 2008 (CEST)
		+
		+	I don't actually understand what those "indexes" are. Are they resource IDs? I see different IDs in my Mohawk files (2002, 2004... in stone.dat). Maybe they are indexes in the sense of the Mohawk format? If this is the case, please use resources IDs instead, that's what is meant to be used.