Re: ADMIN: VRML + JAVA - A Wedding

James Waldrop ([email protected])
Wed, 18 Oct 1995 08:59:54 -0700

Master Zap wrote:
>-- [ From: Master Zap * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] --
>
>> >Yes and no. Initially I wanted to "forbid" anything non-deterministic. I
>am
>> >slowly changing my mind, and I think I would allow some small amount of
>> >nondeterminisms, and slight deviations from the STRICT function-of-time
>> >requirements.
>>
>> Ack, stop right there!!!!!
>>
>> Excuse me, but we shouldn't repeat the past here! You'd be recreating a
>> cgi-bin world where we have scripts producing animations on the fly. And
>> completely ignoring the most interesting issues of interaction altogether.
>
>What?
>
>Am I the only one that doesn't understand this sentence?
>
>What am I ignoring?

Well, you just said your proposal would forbid all but slight deviations
from nondeterminism. I have a serious problem with that, since the most
interesting behaviors aren't deterministic. In fact, yours is the first
proposal I've seen that had such a requirement. That's enough esason to
reject it on its face.

James

--
James Waldrop				/   Technical Director
[email protected]		/	    Construct Internet Design
[email protected]		/		    http://www.construct.net

  • Next message: James Waldrop: "Re: Behaviours (Was: Re: ADMIN: VRML + JAVA - A Wedding)"
  • Previous message: Master Zap: "Re: Behaviours (Was: Re: ADMIN: VRML + JAVA - A Wedding)"
  • In reply to: Master Zap: "Re: ADMIN: VRML + JAVA - A Wedding"
  • Next in thesad: Master Zap: "Re: ADMIN: VRML + JAVA - A Wedding"