Re: Common Objects

Brian Behlendorf ([email protected])
Mon, 29 May 1995 12:42:19 -0700 (PDT)


On Mon, 29 May 1995, Richard Tilmann wrote:
> Perhaps I have missed a part of this thread, but I have a concern.
>
> I understand the concern for seeking efficiencies in use of bandwidth,
> but .... the use of 'common objects' seems to move away from the ability
> to design and create unique and individualized VR spaces. I've seen an
> increasing number of convolutions and complexities added to the original
> idea in order to address issues of orientation, scale, color, surface
> maping, etc. that we are almost right back to the place we started from.

That's mostly a quality of implementation issue, though - if we can show
there are cases where such caching/common objects help (I definitely think
we can) and that it can't really be solved by other means (I think we can
make that case too) then it should be allowed. This isn't to say
*everyone* needs to use it all the time, it just allows it. It could
definitely be overused, but I think the average human ego won't make
same-ish scenes that much a danger. Besides, given the right
tranformations you could probably look at the same teapot 100 times in
100 different ways and not get bored. :)

Brian

--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--
[email protected] [email protected] http://www.[hyperreal,organic].com/