Here are some interesting points that came up which should be part of the
discussion, IMHO:
1) One question raised involves how VRML can achieve true multi-user
interactivity. Of course, VRML 1.0 has very little provision for
interaction; this was understood when it was drafted. Someone on the chat
mentioned the use, in 2.0, of some kind of interaction node (or class of
nodes?) which would allow object interactions. Unfortunately, there seems
to be a problem: can a static .WRL file, even with the 2.0spec, truly
handle interactivity?
We think that between two objects which are programmed, the .WRL file which
the clients download will specify fully how the objects act and/or
interact under given conditions. But when you add the human factor - i.e.
actual users (or avatars, of SnowCrash fame) - a simple static .WRL file
doesn't cut it for interactivity. All of the sudden, you must have a
sophisticated client/server setup to allow the passage of messages
between clients in a net-friendly manner.
2) Another important factor. Many people on IRC last night have read
SnowCrash, so I'd like to use that as sort of a philosophical branching
point. Are we moving towards one big world (i.e. a metaverse) or are we
heading towards a number of different worlds (i.e. the current situation
with MUDS/MOOS/MUSHS/etc).
Discussion?
-- -- --
Dave Peck http://www.mbhs.edu/~dpeck/ Macintosh Programmer
"Weep for the future. Weep for us all..." - Babylon 5