I have updated the REP. We've received a lot of +1s on this one with
the issues around the gripper addressed, so barring any objections,
I'm inclined to mark this one 'Active'. (speak now or forever hold
your piece)
- Ken
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 5:39 AM, Thomas Moulard <
thomas.moulard@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Jack O'Quin <jack.oquin@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Thomas Moulard <thomas.moulard@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Jack O'Quin <jack.oquin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> REP-0103 says:
>>>>
>>>> "In relation to a body the standard is: x forward, y left, z up".
>>>>
>>>> While "up" may seem arbitrary for a gripper, "forward" suggests the
>>>> direction to which it is extended.
>>>
>>> Sorry for the delay.
>>> What would be your proposition, removing the scheme and just adding that
>>> the frames is oriented as X toward the object and Y the object main axis?
>>
>> Definitely, X toward the object.
>>
>> I propose Y to be the main dimension in which the "fingers" of the
>> gripper move. Some hand-like or claw-like devices may not fit that
>> notion very well, but it can probably be defined in a way that is at
>> least understandable.
>>
>> Z would be the remaining dimension, orthogonal to X and Y.
>
> Ok. I updated the REP to match the new orientation.
> Is there any additional suggestions?
> --
> Thomas Moulard
>
> _______________________________________________
> ros-users mailing list
> ros-users@code.ros.org
> https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
>
(text/plain)