----------
| From: Mike McCue <[email protected]>
| To: Colin Campbell
| Cc: <[email protected]>
| Subject: Bottom line on ActiveVRML
| Date: Friday, December 08, 1995 3:15AM
|
||
| Colin Campbell at Microsoft writes:
| >ActiveVRML is a 4D representation, just like VRML is a 3D representation.
| >...
| >To put it another way, why not use Java or C to implement drawing
| >commands and skip VRML altogether? The answer of course is that having
| >a representation is a Good Thing
|
| This is an *excellent*, bottom line summary of what ActiveVRML
| is all about. Even though
| there is overlap with VRML in some aesas, it is extremely
| unfortunate that MS chose to name
| this otherwise well thought out proposal by attaching the VRML
| suffix. The name alone will
| cause many misconceptions, not to mention flat out rejections
| due to the highly charged
| political nature of the letters V-R-M-L.
|
| Given that MS is saying that their proposal is meant to
| represent any collection of data
| types over time, I suggest we consider ActiveVRML for what it really
is: a time based
| markup language for groups of static data types.
|
| - mike
|
Any name suggestions out there? Because AV is a 4D modeling language,
it really is a natural extension for the VRML 3D modeling language.
Colin