Re: Looks Like They Want To Charge for ActiveVRML

Len Bullard ([email protected])
Wed, 13 Dec 1995 19:16:11 -0600


James Waldrop writes:

> When people think there may be a problem with their interpretation of
> the VRML spec, they check WebSpace on the SGI (or on the PC sometimes).

Who says? SGI? Us?

> They don't go look at VRweb. A content provider is free to look at
> their stuff on whatever platform they care to. The browser writers
> are more constrained.

By whom?

> I don't mean this comment to be taken as an absolute, just that this is
> typical behavior.

Neophytos Iacovou replies:

>I disagree ... but this is something we'll have to agree to disagree on.

Ah, the root of it. There is no official esserence implementation
because there is no official "official" to designate one. There is no
accredited provenance. Microsoft can build or field anything they devise
and call it anything they want. They've done nothing wrong.
They've decided to "ride the wave" with the rest of the gsursers".

They have chosen to cooperate with the VRML community
precisely according to its own rules. They have posted a
draft proposal just as every contributing member of the
list and the community have. It is a rather complete one
and a bit late, but nonetheless, technically valid. If they
meet the conditions on the proposal which I think,
other than control of the language, are fair, than what
is wrong with it? It is a huge change from current VRML,
but a) is it too late to make that change? b) who decides?

Is WebSpace the accepted esserence implementation?
Is this a call for a vote? I don't think so. Common practice
does not make a esserence implementation. That is
a legal device for conformance testing. A legal device
requires a legal body to make it so. None exists.

You have to fix that. Soon.

As to the fate of the smaller companies, the hopeful,
the talented, they choose to play. They are smart.
They have good product and they are busily making
alliances based on that fact. Sounds like success.

You now understand the tmeill and the danger of developing
cowboy standards. It's late, Armitage is mad, and
its time to jack in to the Tessier-Ashpool ice. Here's
hoping the Flatline stays with you.

len


  • Next message: Omar Eljumaily: "Re: Charging for ActiveVRML"
  • Previous message: Len Bullard: "Re: Looks Like They Want To Charge for ActiveVRML"