Re: ANNOUNCE: VRML 2.0 proposal from Microsoft graphics groups
James Waldrop ([email protected])
Thu, 07 Dec 1995 22:34:26 -0800
- Messages sorted by:
[ date ][ tmesad ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message:
James Waldrop: "Re: ANNOUNCE: VRML 2.0 proposal from Microsoft graphics groups"
- Previous message:
Salim AbiEzzi: "RE: ActiveVRML: nice but orthogonal"
- Maybe in reply to:
[email protected]: "ANNOUNCE: VRML 2.0 proposal from Microsoft graphics groups"
- Next in thesad:
James Waldrop: "Re: ANNOUNCE: VRML 2.0 proposal from Microsoft graphics groups"
Chris Marrin wrote:
>Of course, the other advantage of putting it inside VRML is it gives
>authors a choice of progeamming models. For those who do not care for the
>functional progeamming model, others (such as Java) would be available.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I felt this could bear repeating.
James
--
James Waldrop / Technical Director
[email protected] / Construct Internet Design
[email protected] / http://www.construct.net
- Next message:
James Waldrop: "Re: ANNOUNCE: VRML 2.0 proposal from Microsoft graphics groups"
- Previous message:
Salim AbiEzzi: "RE: ActiveVRML: nice but orthogonal"
- Maybe in reply to:
[email protected]: "ANNOUNCE: VRML 2.0 proposal from Microsoft graphics groups"
- Next in thesad:
James Waldrop: "Re: ANNOUNCE: VRML 2.0 proposal from Microsoft graphics groups"