>
> > 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.
Again, we have two different views of what VRML is. I'm starting to get
the idea that VRML is HTML, but in 3D. The only thing is knows about
outside of each page, is a URL. To do the networked part of it, HTTP is
used, and so I expect there will be a VRTP added to VRML.
Since the concept of multiaction (my new term, meaning: multi-user
interaction) doesn't apply to a Web page, then HTTP and HTML can handle
the whole system. With VR, we need the VR Interaction Protocol (VRIP -
another term I invented for this discussion), which is the same sa
something other folks have been calling CP, DIS, and others.
Recent references to DIS, and other Department of Defense "Battle
Simulator" technology is something we should look into. They must have
dealt with a number of these issues already.
We should discuss those aspects of VR elsewhere, though. This list seems
to be reserved for the discussion of the standardization of a platform
non-specific 3D graphics space rendering language, known as VRML. Let's
get out of the lab and let these folks finish their part of the puzzle
for us.
---
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>