First, isn't the interest in VRML *amazing* ?!? WebSpace has gotten alot
of attention, as had MArk Pesce (at least in the magazines I've seen...)
TGS demonstrated WEbSpace on Windows NT, which got a lot of attention. From
that, and a discussion about how we developed WebSpace, a few developers
asked to see OPen Inventor. On a few occasions we demonstrated SceneViewer
on Windows NT, and read in Inventor files, including some with engines.
We made it *clear* to those within ear-shot that these files were of .iv
versus .wrl type. From James' comments:
>1) They were demoing Inventor files. Windmills were turning...
Any non-VRML features were demonstrated as NON_VRML, though we'll not do this
at future shows based on not being able to insure all can hear the demo
as it happens. Realize though that TGS is interested in providing a utility
that supports MANY file formats, not just VRML. We want people to be able
to share .iv, .dxf, .3ds and so on over the net and email, with VRML being
the way to interact/navigate with the content. This approach allows all
the existing net-based content (of many different types) to be accessed
by a single utiltiy, which will save as VRML, facilitating the migration
to the .wrl type.
TGS will support *WHATEVER* is decided for VRML 2.0 and on within our product
offering, whether it is already a part of Open Inventor or something new.
>2) Inline video was discussed as a feature that would be supported.
We will support ALL URL links to other media types via WWWAnchor, not with
any special VRML 1.0+ thing.
>3 Most interestingly, inline VRML was supported....
Yes we support in-lines.
>4) Their authoring tool could write both iv and vrml. Their browser
> will understand both iv and vrml.
Again, I think it is a mistake to think that we will get VRML adoption by
the approach of "take all your existing content an convert!" WebSpace
is a 3D Viewer that supports VRML and other file types. It will only
save as VRML, however, providing a built-in way to do conversion.
>TGS is driving the 2.0 standard along willy nilly. What's up with that?
What's up with that??? Maybe reading all the press about the wars
between Netscape and Spyglass feeds a level of mis-trust, but give TGS
a break! We've just help raise the interest level of VRML to a point that
alot of people actually care that didn't before last week. We have no
illusions of trying to "build 2.0". TGS has been a part of ANSI/ISO X3H3
for over 16 years - did we "redefine" PHIGS!?!? We know how to contribute
on a cooperative and positive basis to standards.
The best *protection* that VRML can get would be to fold it into a non-business
structure, like W3O, ASAP. We support that approach strongly and will
contribute resources to putting into the public domain VRML 2.0 that
we ALL agree on.
I'm the VP of Marketing for TGS and I can guarantee you that TGS wants a
standard VRML to succeed. Making casual statements about anybody on
a negative basis will slow down the process. How are we to be able to
work in future meetings/efforts if you think TGS is "willy nilly" and we
think we are being mis-represented? Lets all try to enjoy the recent
successes, apply a level of trust to each other and get moving on the
work to be done!
Robert Weideman - VP Marketing - TGS
[email protected]