Why have /three/nodes/ instead of using /three/addons/?

File: three.js/webgl_nodes_loader_gltf_transmission.html at 31d84e8cd349ac68d4f3c22a2a50c60cb73201b5 · mrdoob/three.js · GitHub

<script type="importmap">
		"imports": {
			"three": "../build/three.module.js",
			"three/addons/": "./jsm/",
			"three/nodes": "./jsm/nodes/Nodes.js"

Why have /three/nodes/ instead of loading nodes by import { NodeMaterial, float } from '/three/addons/nodes/Nodes.js';, like everything else is loaded?

Also, why "three/addons/" has forward slash and "three/nodes" doesn’t? Does it make a difference?

Also, Node.js is using node:fs convention, so isn’t three:nodes better?

three/addons/ is a prefix, and individual things are imported from specific paths underneath that folder, like three/addons/loaders/GLTFLoader.js.

three/nodes is an entrypoint, i.e. everything in the node-based shader system can be imported directly from three/nodes. That codebase is still in active development, it may change, and it’s a large module containing many files (unlike most addons) so importing from a single entrypoint is helpful.

Also, the exact Import Map syntax above is not a requirement, you can use bundlers, and there may be other ways of achieving the same thing in your development environment. This is just what three.js has set up.

the node:fs is a Node.js-specific convention, not common in the wider JS ecosystem, the slashes are more common for multiple entrypoints in a package.

Thank you for a very detailed answer.

But I still don’t see any benefit of using import { NodeMaterial, float } from 'three/nodes'; over import { NodeMaterial, float } from '/three/addons/nodes/Nodes.js';.

It’s the same thing.

Yes, those are the same thing for now. You can use either. Using three/nodes is just a convention in the codebase.