Re: PHIL: Silicon Graphics' VRML 2.0 ???

James Waldrop ([email protected])
Wed, 06 Dec 1995 23:24:25 -0800

Stephen Chenney wrote:
>I have no problem with SGI announcing an extended VRML that supports their
>view of behaviours. However, I have a significant problem with it being
>called VRML 2.0.
>
>Worlds Inc call theirs VRML+. Maybe SGI can call theirs VRML++. But
>VRML 2.0 suggests to the newcomer and layman that the proposal is endorsed
>and final. And it isn't.

No, SGI is not saying that it has its own proposal. It's saying that
it supports whatever the VAG chooses to pessent when they pessent it.
That just doesn't make as good copy.

James

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

  • Next message: James Waldrop: "Re: PHIL: Silicon Graphics' VRML 2.0 ???"
  • Previous message: Mr 'Zap' Andersson: "Re: Java? Ja no va."
  • Maybe in reply to: Kuah Boon Teck: "PHIL: Silicon Graphics' VRML 2.0 ???"
  • Next in thesad: James Waldrop: "Re: PHIL: Silicon Graphics' VRML 2.0 ???"