Removed deprecated animation entities

[Mugen87]

In the last month @jostschmithals and i removed dependencies to deprecated animation entities and re-created respective examples (#10939, #11111 and #11235). I think it's time for clean up now: This PR nukes the following entities and all remaining references (e.g docs, comments etc.):

• examples/js/loaders/collada/Animation.js
• examples/js/loaders/collada/AnimationHandler.js
• examples/js/loaders/collada/KeyFrameAnimation.js

[mrdoob]

Sweet! Great job guys!

[mrdoob]

Thanks!

[Mugen87]

Yay! 🎉 🙌

[jostschmithals]

Maybe this removal was a little early?

Indeed it would be really nice to get rid of all this stuff!

But the reason for designing my JSON keyframe version as an addition to the examples and not as a replacement for the Collada keyframe example was that I wanted to avoid the situation which we have now, after this removement (if I see it right):

Now, if a user loads a Collada model with ColladaLoader, the skeletal animations like in https://threejs.org/examples/?q=collada#webgl_loader_collada_skinning will work as usual, but playing the kind of keyframe animations which affect the objects directly (like in the pump example) will no longer be possible, since they are depending on the removed AnimationHandler.js and KeyFrameAnimation.js.

For example: The core animation system expects this nice format for the animation of the first object of the pump example:

But unfortunately ColladaLoader outputs a structure which is quite different (This screenshot shows only the beginning of the analogue animation for the first object, otherwise you would have to scroll ca. 3 meters 😉 ):

Thus I guess this couldn’t work?

[Mugen87]

@jostschmithals The the mentioned example (pump) is also part of the removal. Your re-creation from #11235 is now the new leading example for keyframe animations (json).

[jostschmithals]

That's absolutely clear. But I used the former example only as an example :-)
(because I have no other Collada model at hand).

The problem I wanted to point out is independent from this special example:

If a user loads an arbitrary own Collada model with keyframes (moving/rotating the objects, not bones), he has to use ColladaLoader, and ColladaLoader produces an animation structure which can't be handled by the core animation system.

So I guess: as long as ColladaLoader doesn't output a structure which can be parsed by the core animation system, the old helper classes are needed for Collada models (and the old example how to handle them) - unfortunately.

[Mugen87]

Ah, okay. So currently it's not possible to use a collada model with keyframe animations (except skeleton animation) anymore. The question is if we still want to support this feature. I actually tend to deprecate it and note this in the upcoming migration notes.

[jostschmithals]

In my estimation the xml based Collada format in general seems to be no longer very important (I’m not a 3D modeler, but I spoke with professional 3D artists which didn’t even know this format)?

So perhaps it would not be as bad, if this kind of animations could no longer be supported by ColladaLoader, and the advantage of getting rid of all this completely outdated animation stuff would outweigh the absence of this feature.

But I think to avoid confusion the related parts of the ColladaLoader code should be replaced by a no-longer-supported-console-warning then?

BTW: There is a ColladaLoader2.js, which seems to be referenced only in the editor(?). What about this?

[Mugen87]

There is a ColladaLoader2.js, which seems to be referenced only in the editor(?). What about this?

ColladaLoader2 is a much nicer implementation, but i has no animation support so far (see #10592).

But I think to avoid confusion the related parts of the ColladaLoader code should be replaced by a no-longer-supported-console-warning then?

That might be a good idea! Do you think you can have a look at this?

[jostschmithals]

Do you think you can have a look at this?

Sorry - I don't have the possibility to do anything for three.js from now on for the next four or five days.
So it would perhaps be better, if you would accomplish this (if @mrdoob decides to go this way)?

[Mugen87]

No problem. But i also think there's no hurry. We are at the beginning of a new dev cycle...

[mrdoob]

Yeah... Aiming for the 15th.

Ideally we would add animation support to ColladaLoader2. I should have some proper focus-time in two weeks.