Re: VRML & USENET * What is VRML?

Brian Behlendorf ([email protected])
Tue, 18 Apr 1995 14:51:37 -0800 (PST)


On Tue, 18 Apr 1995, Andrew C. Esh wrote:
> > This is why I would not classify VRML as an "infosystem", even though
> > browsers (as valid HTTP or Web browsers) will be a part of an
> > "infosystem".
>
> OK, I'll drop my "infosystem" point of view, but using the same logic,
> you'd have to rename the protocol or drop the "graphics" idea. "Virtual
> Reality", to me, implies all the senses, not just visual. Maybe you're
> planning 3D Graphics Markup Language (3DGML), here. I thought VRML was
> going to include sound, and maybe later (much later) touch and smell.
> Check out Lawnmower Man. That was my take.

To clarify, I think either comp.graphics.vrml, comp.lang.vrml, or
comp.3d.vrml might be appropriate. Now that I've had time to calm down,
comp.lang.vrml does indeed seem to be the most logical classification.
Mike's chart of possibilities helped that.

Also, one note - consider the possibility that, from this point forward,
all new media types will by default have network-aware tendencies. The
new specification for the image format to replace GIF has imagemap
capabilities built into it, for example. In fact, I think you'll also
see all new applications start life as network aware products as well:
i,e. a word processor that could access and edit data located at
a URL in addition to local files. If every aspect of computing is
touched by WWW technology, then surely we can't move all of comp.* to
comp.infosystems.www.* :)

Brian