b3dm samples - TilesetWithRequestVolume - city invalid? about 3d-tiles-validator HOT 4 CLOSED

A short update: From the options mentioned above, I think that only option B is a reasonable one. Options C and D would require modifying the GLB data in a way that should not be required by someone who just wants to "wrap" a GLB into a B3DM. Option B should be easy to implement for clients (and there's already a draft PR for covering this in the validator). But it may require a clarification in the specification. The suggestion for that is tracked at CesiumGS/3d-tiles#729

from 3d-tiles-validator.

This should be fixed via #258 and will be part of the next release. It now implements the validation according to the clarifications in the spec that have been added via CesiumGS/3d-tiles#729 : It is possible to insert padding bytes at the end of the B3DM data (to ensure that its length is divisible by 8). These padding bytes are added after the GLB payload, but will be ignored in the validation of the GLB payload.

from 3d-tiles-validator.

Just a short ping for now:

The validator is correct here. There are some data sets that cause validation issues which have only been detected with the new validator. These data sets include unit test- and sample data in CesiumJS, as well as some of the older sample models in the 3d-tiles-samples repository. (We recently started addressing these issues, e.g. by fixing the spec data via CesiumGS/cesium#10852, but we plan to also apply similar fixes to all other tilesets that are publicly available).

For the ll.b3dm in particular: This B3DM file was originally intended to be "just some dummy object". Unfortunately, it appears in many samples and tests (and ... sometimes the file sizes of these "instances" are different - I think none of them is really "valid" in terms of the alignment requirements).

I just did some experiments, with some preliminary, in-flight results shown in PaddingIssues-2023-01-03.zip. It contains 4 versions of a dummy tileset that refers to the ll.b3dm:

• A, the original one, where the 3D Tiles Validator complains: "The byte length must be aligned to 8 bytes"
• B, with additional 0-bytes at the end of the B3DM, where the glTF validator complains: "Extra data after the end of GLB stream."
• C, with additional 0-bytes at the end of the BIN chunk of the GLB, where the glTF validator complains: "GLB-stored BIN chunk contains 4 extra padding byte(s)."
• D, with additional -bytes (spaces) at the end of the JSON chunk of the GLB, which passes validation.

It is... unfortunate that it is not trivially possible to wrap a GLB into a B3DM without modifying the GLB itself, on a level that one normally does not even have access to (when somebody is just using some existing GLB file or GLB writer). We're currently investigating possible solutions for this issue.

from 3d-tiles-validator.

Ok thanks!

The whole padding rule system feels a bit academic to me, resulting in lots of 'invalid' tilesets that show up in clients anyway. Maybe it's an option to get rid of it?

from 3d-tiles-validator.