[X3D-Public] Fwd: Re: [X3D] X3D HTML5 meetingdiscussions:Declarative 3D interest group at W3C

Philipp Slusallek slusallek at cs.uni-saarland.de
Thu Dec 30 14:39:28 PST 2010


Hi Joe,

I agree with a lot you are saying. I have been around a lot of the stuff
from its beginning and we are not as ignorant as it may seem. As I said
there are many good things in X3D that are worth considering for
integration.

However, on a rather fundamental level X3D has some very basic features
that make it incompatible with HTML and Web technology today (tree
versus DAG, special event system, to name just a few).

Now we have a few options:
(0) We ignore the issues and do not try to get 3D tightly integrated
into browsers: Well people will still do 3D using the WebGL API and
maybe some other declarative approach will likely emerge at some point.

(i) We convince the Web community to change their model to accommodate
the way X3D does 3D: Good luck with that.

(ii) We somehow try to circumvent at least some of the issues: Certainly
possible for some issues, but not very likely from all (or even many
from my perspective). X3DOM has a few suggestions that we should discuss
in terms of the different features and capabilities and how they fit
into the HTML/Web technology stack. This is exactly what the XG group
aims at. However, I remain unconvinced that this will create a system
that is even backwards compatible.

(iii) We start with the infrastructure the Web provides and fit 3D into
this (this is what XMl3D does). Yes, we will have to do 3D differently,
but its not clear that this means it will be less useful.

The start of the W3C Incubator Group is the attempt to bring the best
people and ideas together to make the right decisions going forward. I
am hoping that we get constructive feedback and suggestions from the
Web3D community. But as Chris reminded us, we should start with an open
mind and not just pretend that things will have to be exactly as they
have been in X3D.

One of the discussions could be on the merits of the X3D event system,
how its can possibly be integrated in HTML, and what are alternatives.

	Philipp

Am 30.12.2010 21:12, schrieb Joe D Williams:
>> Please don't ask me to do brain surgery with a spoon.
> 
> Maybe some new tools? SInce the end objective must be to represent the
> element as a live scriptable DOM tree then lots of stuff like passing
> data to and from the embedded context and controlling processing within
> the thing may be easier or at least more familiar to many If they give
> us a good DOM to play with.
> But heck we all know how easy it is to do easy stuff with simple
> animations and interactions. As len said somewhen,"Rendering and
> behavioral fidelity are equal requirements in these systems". We now see
> that it is relatively common to get similar rendering fidelity between
> platforms, even approaching 'realistic' high fidelity in appearance even
> when an appearance is complex. And, so it will be with fidelity for
> simple behaviours. Heck maybe all somebody has to learn is some 3DCSS.
> When behaviors get complex and require synchronization to achieve
> fidelity, our mastery of the DOM event system will define 'realistic' to
> the user. Then, getting almost to what is needed for real hifi fun
> discover why the X3D SAI internal/external event system works like it does.
> 
> Or, maybe some tech or practice that would shake up our event system
> 'pipeline' like shaders changed the rendering pipeline.
> Joe
> 
> _______________________________________________
> X3D-Public mailing list
> X3D-Public at web3d.org
> http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org




More information about the X3D-Public mailing list