3
$\begingroup$

I think this is a distinct topic. The contexts are different and use cases as well. I think there will be questions specific to Node Tools and a tag is appropriate.

What do you think?


Related question:
How to select an edge loop with geometry nodes tool mode nodes?

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ Well, you're basically right, but ....Node Tools are Geometry Nodes. Is a separate tag really needed here? In my opinion, the topics are too close together, which is why I removed the tag again. Remember the geometry-nodes-fields tag, which was migrated to geometry-nodes. But as I said, let's hear what others think about it. $\endgroup$
    – quellenform Mod
    Commented Nov 15, 2023 at 22:52
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Hum not sure about it. As Quellenform mentions like Fields, geometry-nodes-tools might be seen as an integral part of Geometry-Nodes in general, on the other hand, it does involve 3D View interaction, and a new set of constraints, which might be seen as new thing of its own, like simulation-nodes. Its a bit fuzzy, I'd be inclined to include it but I don't have strong feelings either way. In the same vein we might soon need to discuss the upcoming geometry-nodes-gizmos $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 15, 2023 at 23:00
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ The functionality is very different in terms of workflows they are used for. One is non-destructive, the other is destructive. I think people might be more interested in one than the other in some cases. For example it makes sense to filter only Node Tools questions if I want to see how people are making or attempting to make their destructive workflows more convenient if I am interested in learning more about that. In that sense I see this as very different than fields, because fields just are a part of all geometry nodes and tools are a separate type. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 15, 2023 at 23:12
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ For example my original intention of the question blender.stackexchange.com/questions/304841/… is to create a tool for everyday modelling work and I don't know, that just seems like a completely different thing than Modifier type that is about manipulating the geometry of a specific object. One is workflow improvement, the other is work to achieve a goal. Personaly I find those concepts very different. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 15, 2023 at 23:19
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ 2¢ .. As Blender gradually heads to Everything Nodes, I, too, imagine that Geometry Nodes will need splitting into categories.. GN-Modifiers, GN-Tools, GN-Simulation, .. possibly others, for very different use-cases and implementation problems, as the system develops. As the main purpose of tags is to reduce search-space, the criteria for me are: semantic distinction, category size.. and the size has to be anticipated, unless we can tag retrospectively. $\endgroup$
    – Robin Betts Mod
    Commented Nov 16, 2023 at 18:38
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @RobinBetts Good points. Also having an unanted tag and removing it or merging is relatively easy. Not having one and retroactively trying to tag all relevant questions is near impossible $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 22, 2023 at 19:56

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .