Detecting sitting avatar
|
|
Cynthia Centaur
Registered User
Join date: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 22
|
07-03-2008 11:53
Hi
I have the following problem, but no solution:
within an object that uses llVolumeDetect I need to detect an avatar that sits on a colliding object.
Detecting the event isn't the problem.
Finding the key of the colliding object isn't the problem.
getting the number of linked prims is possible.
But....accessing individual prims in the colliding object and thus finding any sitting avatar seems impossible.
Anybody out there having a hint for me?
best regards Cynthia
|
|
Darien Caldwell
Registered User
Join date: 12 Oct 2006
Posts: 3,127
|
07-03-2008 12:09
llAvatarOnSitTarget();
|
|
Hewee Zetkin
Registered User
Join date: 20 Jul 2006
Posts: 2,702
|
07-03-2008 12:21
From: Darien Caldwell llAvatarOnSitTarget(); Not going to work. That only gives the key of the avatar sitting on the current prim's sit target, not the key of an avatar sitting on an object colliding with this one. You might have to do a sensor as well or instead of the volume detect. I THINK a sensor filtered on AGENT will catch avatars even if they are sitting on objects. Hmm. Best test it though.
|
|
Xhawkx Holden
Registered User
Join date: 1 Nov 2006
Posts: 86
|
07-03-2008 13:24
you COULD take the key of the colliding object and use
llGetAgentInfo
and check for AGENT_SITTING
|
|
Darien Caldwell
Registered User
Join date: 12 Oct 2006
Posts: 3,127
|
07-03-2008 13:26
From: Hewee Zetkin Not going to work. That only gives the key of the avatar sitting on the current prim's sit target, not the key of an avatar sitting on an object colliding with this one.
You might have to do a sensor as well or instead of the volume detect. I THINK a sensor filtered on AGENT will catch avatars even if they are sitting on objects. Hmm. Best test it though. Ah, I misread what they were asking. I thought their object was colliding while having someone sit on it. A bit ambiguous.  As I recall a sitting avatar will show up on sensor. Likely the best way.
|
|
Darien Caldwell
Registered User
Join date: 12 Oct 2006
Posts: 3,127
|
07-03-2008 13:29
From: Xhawkx Holden you COULD take the key of the colliding object and use
llGetAgentInfo
and check for AGENT_SITTING But wouldn't llGetAgentInfo be working on the object, and not the avatar? I still think you would need to Sensor the Avatar's key, not the object's key, as Hewee suggested.
|
|
Cynthia Centaur
Registered User
Join date: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 22
|
07-03-2008 22:00
Hmm,
thanks for the replies so far.
I checked out with llGetAgentInfo and it will give me that fact that there is an agent around that's sitting. But it will not give me the information on what the agent is sitting.
I also checked llAvatarSitOnTarget() but this takes on object key. So it only works from within the object the avies is sitting upon.
For me it's mandatory to have an unambiguous connection between the colliding object and an avatar sitting on it.
Doing additional sensing might be possible but will that give me that connection?
Best regards Cyn
|
|
Hewee Zetkin
Registered User
Join date: 20 Jul 2006
Posts: 2,702
|
07-03-2008 23:19
From: Cynthia Centaur For me it's mandatory to have an unambiguous connection between the colliding object and an avatar sitting on it.
Doing additional sensing might be possible but will that give me that connection? No. Unfortunately what you want is impossible, unless you can insert scripts into the objects that will have the avatars on them. Sorry, but there's just no provision in the LSL library so far for what you want (heck, you can't even figure out what object an avatar is sitting on from an attachment!). I suggest rethinking your requirements and design philosophy so your system doesn't depend on that data.
|
|
Cynthia Centaur
Registered User
Join date: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 22
|
07-04-2008 03:32
From: someone No. Unfortunately what you want is impossible, unless you can insert scripts into the objects that will have the avatars on them. Thanks Hewee, I already feared that but I hoped I had overlooked something. So it looks like this feature will not get implemented. Cynthia
|