Re: VRML usage

Mark Waks ([email protected])
Thu, 20 Apr 95 10:47:37 EDT


>> Syncing the browsers is completely unnecessary unless we are
>> trying to create multi-user environments which I do not beleive is a goal
>> for VRML 2.0. If I'm out of sync with you, how do I know? Why do I care?
>
>I strongly believe it is a goal. And how to achieve it is the major
>architectural
>decisions in VRML 2.0. It may turn out that it is not in VRML 2.0, the
>language,
>but it is certainly in the VRML 2.0 feature lists.

Opinion: this really shouldn't be part of VRML itself. If we make
VRML into a hodgepodge of concepts, it's likely to wind up a real
mess. As it is, it's a nice language for describing the "space" of
cyberspace, and the objects therein. I'd say that this issue is
sliding over into the region of behavior, and really ought to be
another orthogonal issue, probably an agreed protocol for the
browsers...

In other words, multi-user environments will *use* VRML, but VRML
will not *describe* multi-user environments -- a higher-level
protocol will...

-- Justin

Random Quote du Jour:

"It's simple. It's logical. It's easy to implement. It leaves little for
people to argue over. It's anti-USENET."
-- chuq