LSL Protocol/Restrained Love Open Relay Group/vision
Implemented in THINK KINK's tkPBA v30k and above, in Dominatech Relay 2.1, in Dahlia's multirelay and in Satomi's Multi-Relay 1.03b2
- meta command to control what the victim can see while under restraint. This will allow a full range of vision control of the victim. Full blindness, partial, color, textures, etc..
- using a small microprim that hides on the back of our RelayHUD, we can expand and texture this to control the sight of the victim. Put them in a dark cell, they go blind. Or in a forcefield change the color, make it partially transparant, put up a texture, etc. We are/will also be using this as a "MouseLook" enforcer to punish a victim when they won't stay in mouselook (get out of mouselook, go totally blind). Currently being implemented in devices from THINK KINK.
- (color) = color for the HUD covering prim in RGB format <r'g'b> 0-255 (NOTE: the ' is the seperator instead of , to avoid parsing issues with the rest of the RLV command string)
- (alpha) = % transparent to make the HUD prim cover (in alpha format 0.0-1.0)
- (texture) = UUID for a texture to apply to the prim
- (repeats) = x/y repeats for the texture, same format as the texture tab on an prim 1.0'1.0
- (offsets) = x/y offsets for the texture, same format as the texture tab on an prim 0.0'0.0
- (rotation) = rotation of the texture
- SPECIAL ENTRY, any of the parameters can be replaced with "*" for 'do not change existing value'
- NOTE: the 'default' value of the HUD prim is 100% transparent, white, TEXTURE_BLANK. ie. !vision/<255'255'255>/0.0/TEXTURE_BLANK/1.0'1.0/0.0'0.0
- if all you want to do is 'blind' someone, then !vision/<0'0'0>/1.0/*/*/*/*
- The second form clears the vision restriction set.
- Total blackout "!x-vision/<0'0'0>/1.0/TEXTURE_BLANK/1.0'1.0/0.0'0.0/0.0
- Light fog "!x-vision/<128'128'128>/0.5/TEXTURE_BLANK/1.0'1.0/0.0'0.0/0.0"
- In a plywood box no matter where they look "!x-vision/<255'255'255>/1.0/TEXTURE_PLYWOOD/1.0'1.0/0.0'0.0"
Although this feature has been extensively discussed elsewhere, that discussion was unnecessarily contentious and is not repeated here.