> 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.
OK. You technical folks can adjourn to the "lang" area, and us crazy
dreamers and philosphers will wait with baited breath in the "infosystems
area for the creation of comp.infosystems.vrwww, which is what will be
based on VRML and VRTP. Hurry it up, will ya? :)
> 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.* :)
I can't wait! A URL then becomes the exact same thing as a filesystem's
directory entry (filename), and someone else is paying to store it! Oh,
man, what about hot links, Publish/Subscribe, and other live inline
service and resource links? Is HTTP going to have to be extended to
include a network-oriented version of Dynamic Data Exchange (NetDDE)?
(Maybe this is the answer to the multi-user-interactivity question I
raised in another message.)
Where will it end? (I know. It never will. That's the best part about it.)
---
Andrew C. Esh mailto:[email protected]
Computer Network Technology [email protected] (finger for PGP key)
6500 Wedgwood Road 612.550.8000 (main)
Maple Grove MN 55311 612.550.8229 (direct)
<A HREF="http://www.mtn.org/~andrewes">ACE Home Page</A>