On Mon, 3 Apr 1995, Alexander the Great wrote:
> Hrmm.. how interesting. My main interest in VRML is justas yours, for a
> MUSH perspective. We're working on creating an advanced MUSH server,
> incorporating many elements such as Ripscrip (an under used imaging
> protocol IMHO) and various other elements (I'll not address the munitiae
> of MUSHdom for the mainly underinterested in my view).
Agreed, RIPScrip is an under-used protocol, which is great for use over
the modem. (In fact, I mentioned ViBES in my last posting, which is where
I first used it; many MUSH objects had attributes with RIPScrip code;
these attributes would be triggered as necessary; the exits in our MUSH
had RIPScrip-clickable code.) However, a much more powerful graphical
description language (such as VRML1.0) is more apt for a massive
extension of a MUSH concept.
Let me clarify my initial posting: I realize that the intent of VRML
creators was that 2.0 would support interactivity; what I suggested
(in a vague, general fashion) was simply a means of achieving this
interactivity. (Some people wrote me personally,
stating that I was trying to undermine to goals of VRML. They
might be right, however, depending on the vision of the VRML1.0
creators...) Anyways.
> I know GenerationsMURV (we change to MURV-MultiUser Roleplay
> Vision (tm) due to how many changes we are engaging in) would benefit
> from and be interested in purusing at least as a test site basis for such
> a system (note, my coders are really too busy to help out now, but in the
> future I'm sure they would enjoy assisting).
MURV - i like that - what a nice ring to it...
> Considering it was David that posted, I'll direct it to him.
> David, if you wish to discuss this further, please mail [email protected]
> directly (same me, different acct) and we can further discuss this course
> of action as well as possible test site status and, of course, we fully
> share code
Sounds great! I was talking more about a possible method of achieving
true interactivity, and wasn't specifically speaking of code. However, I
have done some coding along these lines, but nothing special yet.
Re: language holy wars. I think it is possible (and a good idea) to
avoid the wars by making the specification in such a way that objects can
be programmed in any language. This is quite possible, if you treat an
object as an actual TCP/IP server program which sends a specific set of
messages to change its VRML appearance and achieve other effects; of
course, the TCP/IP server could be programmed in any language. (Actually,
I'm really thinking along these lines: each site which wants to serve
information to this virtual "world", which comprises the entire Internet,
would have to run multiple servers. One server would handle geography
data; another would handle object interactions, and so on. In fact, the
idea I'm toying with now involves multiple levels of servers which each
have different functions, and which interact with each other and the
client program, to create a generically defined virtual world. More
later.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Peck
http://www.mbhs.edu/~dpeck/
Macintosh SW Games Programmer
"Weep for the future. Weep for us all..." - B5
> On Mon, 3 Apr 1995, David Peck wrote:
>
> > I've followed along the development of VRML since this group began, but I
> > remained silent. Now I feel the need to speak. VRML is really, really,
> > exciting - not as an extension to the web, but as the next step in the
> > MUSH paradigm. I seriously believe that we should start looking at making
> > a 3D interactive MUSH based on already available code for various
> > text-based MUSH schemes that already exist.
> >
> > ( An aside: Many people view MUSH as just a game; my experience has proved
> > otherwise. I helped set-up, administrate, and create a MUSH devoted to
> > interactiveeducation over the network; it was called ViBES. Students from
> > across the Internet could log in, and attend virtual classes taught by
> > teachers which were either programmed, or actually logged on to the MUSH
> > through their computers. What we learned from the project: the idea is,
> > basically, a very good one - but with a very serious flaw: text based
> > learning is difficult, if not impossible; it is difficult for a student
> > to respect a teacher he only knows as a MUSH object :-)
> >
> > Enter VRML. Imagine _seeing_, in 3D, the other logged-in users of a MUSH,
> > walking around this virtually constructed world. Everything in the world
> > would be a programmed object, which has display properties (this includes
> > both audio and video), and properties to determine how that object
> > functions. (i.e. a virtual grandfather clock object could be programed -
> > it would keep time, chime on the hour, and even need to be wound up every
> > couple of days).
> >
> > This vision of the internet is, in my opinion, shared by many, and I
> > believe that VRML is a necessary step in seeing this vision come true.
> >
> > I know this posting is totally generic, but this is purposefully so. I've
> > been working on a very specific specification on an extended
> > MUSH+VRML system which I intend to make public soon; until then, I'd like
> > to hear everyone's thoughts on this exciting topic.
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > David Peck
> > http://www.mbhs.edu/~dpeck/
> > Macintosh SW Games Programmer
> > "Weep for the future. Weep for us all..." - B5
> >
> >
>