On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Jack O'Quin <
jack.oquin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I do need a camera name to use, but it sounds like overloading the
>>> node name was not a good idea.
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Blaise Gassend <blaise@willowgarage.com> wrote:
>>Not sure I get what you mean by this.
> CameraInfoManager uses the base part of the node name for a default
> camera name. I intend to pass that as a parameter to the constructor,
> instead. Still TODO.
>
> The camera name is required by camera_calibration_parsers and is
> sometimes used to construct a file name for saving CameraInfo data.
>
> No big deal, just some messy details. Decoupling CameraInfoManager
> from the node name is clearly right, and intended all along.
Fixed now in SVN. Uses the base frame ID (after the last slash) as the
camera name. That seems reasonable. May be overridden in
CameraInfoManager if the calibration file returns a camera name.
No messy poking around with the node name for CameraInfoManager any more.
Frame ID is now resolved correctly using tf_prefix (adding a dependency on tf).
The driver node name still does affect the published topic names. Need
more study to determine what to do instead.
--
joq
(text/plain)