Exclusion Logic For Asset Formats: A Comprehensive Guide

Oct 18, 2025 by ADMIN 57 views

Hey guys! Today, we're diving deep into the fascinating world of exclusion logic when dealing with asset formats. This is super important for anyone managing digital assets, especially in fields like 3D modeling, gaming, and virtual reality. We'll break down the current behavior, explore potential improvements, and discuss how to handle multiple negative format types. So, buckle up and let's get started!

Understanding the Current Behavior

Currently, the exclusion logic seems to operate in a way that might not be the most intuitive for everyone. Let's take a look at an example to illustrate this:

assets?format=GLTF2&format=-TILT

Under the current behavior, this query would likely return all assets that either have a GLTF2 format or don't have a TILT file. This can be a bit confusing because it includes assets that have GLTF2 regardless of whether they have a TILT file, as well as assets that don't have a TILT file even if they don't have GLTF2. This can lead to unexpected results and make it harder to get exactly what you need. The heart of the current system appears to prioritize the presence of the positive format (GLTF2) or the absence of the negative format (TILT), creating a broader, less precise filter. This behavior might stem from a design choice to ensure no assets are unintentionally excluded, but it introduces complexity when users have specific exclusion requirements.

This approach might be useful in some niche cases, but for many users, it doesn't quite hit the mark. Imagine you're trying to find all your assets in GLTF2 format, but you specifically want to exclude those that also have a TILT version. The current behavior wouldn't give you that directly, which brings us to the proposed alternative.

The More Intuitive Approach: Option 2

Now, let's talk about a more useful approach – Option 2. This option suggests that the query should return all assets that have GLTF2 format but do not have a TILT file. This makes a lot more sense in many real-world scenarios.

Think about it: you might want to use this logic to filter out older versions of assets or specific formats that cause compatibility issues. For instance, if you're working on a project that doesn't support the TILT format, you'd want to easily exclude those files. This exclusion logic ensures you get a refined and relevant set of assets, streamlining your workflow and minimizing potential errors.

To reiterate with the example:

assets?format=GLTF2&format=-TILT

With Option 2, this query specifically targets assets that are in GLTF2 format and excludes those that have a TILT file. This approach aligns more closely with the common use case of wanting a specific format while actively avoiding another. Imagine you have a library of 3D models, and you want to update all your GLTF2 models to a newer format, but you don't want to touch the older TILT files yet. This logic lets you isolate exactly the files you need to work on, making your workflow smoother and more efficient.

A Real-World Use Case

Let's say you're developing a game and you've updated all your models to the latest GLTF2 format. However, some older models are still in the TILT format. You want to create a list of all GLTF2 models that don't have a TILT version so you can test them in the game engine. Option 2 makes this super easy!

Extending to Multiple Formats: Consistency is Key

When we start thinking about multiple formats, things get even more interesting. If we're going to extend this exclusion logic, we need to make sure it's consistent and easy to understand. This is where the discussion of how to handle multiple negative formats comes into play. Consistency in handling multiple formats is crucial for a predictable and user-friendly experience. When the logic behaves the same way regardless of the number of formats involved, users can quickly grasp the system and apply it effectively in various scenarios.

To keep things consistent, we need to define clear rules for how multiple negative formats interact with each other. This ensures that the system behaves predictably and aligns with user expectations, minimizing confusion and potential errors.

Handling Multiple Negative Formats: Two Approaches

So, how should we handle multiple negative formats? There are two main options to consider:

Option 1: OR Them All Together

This approach would treat multiple negative formats as an OR condition. For example:

assets?format=-TILT&format=-BLOCKS

This query would exclude all assets that have either a TILT format or a BLOCKS format. In other words, if an asset has TILT or BLOCKS (or both), it would be excluded. This approach aligns with the way non-exclude queries work, where specifying multiple formats implies an OR condition. It maintains a consistent behavior across the system, making it easier for users to predict the outcome of their queries.

This logic is useful when you want to broadly exclude assets that belong to any of a set of formats. For instance, if you're cleaning up your asset library and want to remove any files in outdated formats like TILT or BLOCKS, this approach simplifies the process.

Option 2: AND Them Together

The second option is to treat multiple negative formats as an AND condition. Using the same example:

assets?format=-TILT&format=-BLOCKS

This query would exclude only those assets that have both TILT and BLOCKS formats. So, if an asset has only TILT or only BLOCKS, it would not be excluded. This approach offers a more restrictive filter, targeting assets that possess a specific combination of formats. It caters to use cases where the co-occurrence of certain formats is a critical factor in the exclusion criteria.

This approach is more niche and might be useful in specific situations where you need to exclude assets that have a very specific combination of formats. For instance, if you're looking for assets that don't rely on a particular combination of plugins or dependencies, this logic could be helpful.

Why Option 1 (OR) Seems More Useful

At first glance, Option 1 (OR) seems like the more practical choice. Here's why:

Consistency: As mentioned earlier, it's consistent with how non-exclude queries work. When you ask for format=A&format=B, you're typically asking for assets that have either A or B. Keeping the exclusion logic consistent makes the system more predictable.
Usefulness: In most scenarios, you're more likely to want to exclude assets that have any of a set of formats, rather than all of those formats. Option 1 caters to this common use case.

Imagine you're preparing assets for a new platform that doesn't support TILT or BLOCKS. You'd want to exclude any asset that has either of those formats, which aligns perfectly with Option 1.

Option 1's alignment with the behavior of non-exclude queries fosters a more intuitive understanding of the system. Users can apply their existing knowledge of format queries to exclusion logic, reducing the learning curve and minimizing potential errors. This consistency simplifies the user experience and promotes efficient asset management.

Conclusion: Streamlining Asset Management

In conclusion, the discussion around exclusion logic for asset formats is crucial for building a robust and user-friendly system. Option 2 (excluding assets that have the positive format but also have the negative format) seems like a more intuitive and useful approach than the current behavior. And when it comes to handling multiple negative formats, Option 1 (OR-ing them together) appears to be the most consistent and practical choice.

By implementing these changes, we can make asset management a whole lot easier and more efficient for everyone. The key takeaway is that clear, consistent logic empowers users to manage their assets effectively and with confidence. As we refine these systems, we create tools that not only meet the technical requirements but also align with the way users intuitively interact with their digital content.

What do you guys think? Let's keep the conversation going in the comments below! I'm eager to hear your thoughts and experiences on this topic. Together, we can shape the future of asset management and make it a smoother, more enjoyable process for all.