Wait a minute. We browser creators thought you author types were
the geeks! 8-)
>.
>. 2a. Proposal to add as a standard, "must-be-supported" part of the spec.
>. 2b. Authors LOVE the feature and demand all browsers support it.
>. (these go on at the same time)
Take a 180 - isn't the customer supposed to be involved somewhere
in this? Remember the tale of the cannon ball polished to a mirror
finish and adorned with precious jewels. The cannon ball designers just
LOVED the features and demanded it in their product. Too bad
no one bought them.
>So, my point is, how many people right now are actually writing
>browsers for VRML?
We're out there, but we're having great difficulty. But, what else is
new. New venues always start as moving targets. The first people
out of the chute with products accept that and just don't swear as
much at the "author-geeks" (sorry, couldn't resist ;-) as they used to.
>Can we see a show of hands?
*hand raises, fumbling some funky NT spaghetti*
>Someone should start worrying about creating a 3D bake-off
>to make sure all these implementations work together well, and
>don't render scenes in totally different ways.
For now, worry about the specification. The products that best
meet the customer's expectations, regardless of how different they
may be from the spec, will either live or die based on market
acceptance. A browser that perfectly meets the spec does not
guarantee or even hint at viability. The marketplace will figure
out which browsers they want, and the leftovers will just be swept
away.
Greedy Capitalist Mode Disengaged - back to being a "browser
geek". (Boy, it's gonna be a while before you live that one down!)
Carl Gilbert
[email protected]