Re: Geomview

Paul Lindner ([email protected])
Fri, 14 Apr 1995 12:46:52 -0500 (CDT)

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: steve: "Re: VRML Geolocation request"
Previous message: Mark Waks: "Re: Geomview"
Maybe in reply to: David Lewis: "Geomview"
Next in thread: Len Wanger: "Re: Geomview"

David Lewis sez:
.
. Dear Linus:
.
. >I guess I'm not sure what you mean by compliant. Clearly OOGL
. >is compliant to OOGL, and Inventor is compliant to Inventor, and
. >there is no interoperability between the two. Since both are
. >equally VRML, both are compliant?
.
. I'm not quite sure what you mean about "equally VRML." VRML, to my
. understanding, is using OpenInventor as a basis for its standard rather
. than OOGL. This, if I recall, was hashed out and decided about two months
. ago (I'm always open to correction where my facts are wrong).

VRML is a document format that describes a 3D scene. The only
definition of it is the draft specification as published on
http://wrml.wired.com

Anything that goes above and beyond this specification is *NOT* VRML,
and will not be interoperable with other browsers.

Just because TGS or SGI puts it into WebSpace does not make it VRML.

I fear that VRML will turn into another commercial company ramrodding
it's own standard through without concern for openness, or it's
competitors. The general internet community should set where the
standard is going.

-- 
 | Paul Lindner | [email protected]   | Slipping into madness
 |              | Distributed Computing Services  | is good for the sake
 | Gophermaster | University of Minnesota         | of comparison.
///// / / /    /////// / / / /  /  /  /   /      //// / / / /  /  /  /   /

Next message: steve: "Re: VRML Geolocation request"
Previous message: Mark Waks: "Re: Geomview"
Maybe in reply to: David Lewis: "Geomview"
Next in thread: Len Wanger: "Re: Geomview"