# Task: Parent-Child Hierarchy

## Objective
The objective was to create a simple 3D scene with two objects in a parent-child hierarchy, then verify that transformations applied to the parent (such as position and scale) are correctly inherited by the child.

## Vanilla three.js
- Possible: Yes
- Notes: Implemented by creating sunMesh and attaching an earthOrbit group to it (`sunMesh.add(earthOrbit)`), then adding earthMesh to that group. Parent transforms propagate correctly to child.
- Key concepts: Scene graph hierarchy, `THREE.Group` as orbit pivot, local vs world transforms, animation loop for orbit/spin.
- Complexity: Easy

## R3F
- Possible: Yes
- Notes: Implemented by nesting Earth inside a `<group ref={orbitRef}>` inside the Sun `<mesh>`, making Earth a child in the same scene graph hierarchy.
- What R3F abstracted: Declarative JSX scene creation, automatic render lifecycle integration with React, and frame updates via `useFrame` instead of manual renderer/loop setup.
- Complexity: Easy

## Thob Page Builder
- Possible: Yes
- Notes: Implemented by putting the Earth mesh inside the Sun mesh (parent-child). Changing Sun position/scale also affects Earth as expected (Earth follows position and scale inheritance). However, when Earth position is changed directly, Earth shape appears to distort/stretch as it moves farther from Sun but when POI controls are added and we move around a bit we can notice that the earth is correct in size and shape it is just appering distorted/stretched from certain positions/angels.
- Builder steps: Create Sun mesh -> add Earth mesh as child of Sun -> test parent transform inheritance by changing Sun position/scale -> test child local transform by changing Earth position.
- Complexity: Easy

## Comparison Summary
- Possible in all 3? Yes
- Main differences: 
  - Vanilla gives explicit low-level control;
  - R3F gives cleaner declarative hierarchy; 
  - Thob gives fastest visual setup but less predictable child transform behavior in this case. 
  - Animation was not possible in Thob but was possible in vanilla and r3f.
- Where Thob is better: Quick setup and visual parenting without writing code.
- Where Thob is weaker: Child transform behavior is less transparent when editing child position under a transformed parent.
- What feels awkward or unclear: Local vs inherited transforms are not obvious in the editor, and distortion behavior on child position change is unexpected.

## Limitation Type (if any)
- [x] Editor UX limitation
- [x] Runtime limitation
- [ ] Schema / data model limitation
- [x] Component limitation
- [ ] Event system limitation
- [ ] Asset pipeline limitation
- [ ] Unknown / needs investigation

## Workaround
- Is there a workaround? 
  - NO
- No, I tried a lot of different things, like grouping and wraping in flex inside the parent mesh and different ways to place the components.

## Suggested Improvement
- What should improve in Thob? 
  - Make transform inheritance behavior explicit and stable for nested meshes, especially when parent scale is applied and child position is edited.
- It is:
  - editor
  - component
  - runtime
  - UX

## Difficulty Estimate
Easy

## Business Value
High

## Recommendation
Should Thob support this better? Why? 
- Yes. Parent-child transform consistency is a core 3D workflow; reliable nested transforms reduce confusion, improve trust in the builder, and make more advanced scenes practical without code-level debugging.