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

GLG info at 3dnetproductions.com
Wed Jan 5 22:37:07 PST 2011


>>>I think talking about changing the node
>hierarchy, DOM or event system will result in failure.
>>>
>>> We all agree! This will not happen. We see the current
>DOM structure and event system as building ground. We build
>on existing W3C standards.
>>> The question is only how we utilize what is already
>there.
>>
>> Right, and I think the way to start is to try it, see
>where the ragged edges are, and then sand those smooth. The
>real question is what applications are you trying to  do?
>
>Every application which can be mapped to a scene-graph and
>heavily depends on user-interaction.
>High-End games are not on this list. Applications like the
>Body-Brower must be easy to build with the final system.

Hello All,

I think the above touches the heart of the problem. Defining
exactly what it is we are trying to accomplish is crucial.
My take on it can be summerized with the following
evaluation criteria, which I have placed in reversed order
of priority (to assign weight to each criteria - see below).
You are of course welcome to voice your opinions for changes
within the parameters of this discussion. 

CRITERIA:

5- Compliance with existing W3C standards; more advanced
capabilities can always be added via plugins if no other
solutions can be found.

4- Long term potential for use and upgradability of the
implementation. Something that is as solidly grounded as
possible, so there is excellent potential for building on
top of it. Foresight is very important here, so that content
will not get broken down the road.

3- While user applications should be easy to build, this
should not take precedence over the flexibility of the
system, limiting it in some way. 

2- The implementation's speed to market should not take
undue precedence either; It is worth the wait to do
something the best possible way, rather than choosing the
fatest, easiest route. But how close we are to an actual
working implementation should be taken into account.

1- Baby step vs Big step. I have added this here because it
is a point of contention. So the requirement here would be -
the consensus of all involved. IOW, objectively, how popular
is the proposed implementation.


Having laid down the above criteria, now let's try to
measure the proposed solutions with relation to those
criteria and associated weight. In the left column of each
list is the criteria number and thus its weight. In the
middle column is the 'grade' I have given each solution on a
scale of 1 to 9 (This is of course my opinion and highly
subjective - your input is welcome). In the right column
you'll see the calculated rating for each criteria. The
TOTAL at the bottom should be an good indicator of where we
stand. I have tried to be as objective as possible, taking
into account many of the opinions encountered. I do not know
the results before attempting this, but this is fun so let's
so how it turns out. Here we go:

---------------------------
Weight * Grade = Rating
---------------------------
X3DOM

5 * 7 = 35 (W3C Compliance)
4 * 5 = 20 (Foresight)
3 * 6 = 18 (Flexibility)
2 * 7 = 14 (Close to Market)
1 * 7 = 7  (Popular)
TOTAL: 94
---------------------------
XML3D

5 * 7 = 35 (W3C Compliance)
4 * 8 = 32 (Foresight)
3 * 9 = 27 (Flexibility)
2 * 5 = 10 (Close to Market)
1 * 5 = 5  (Popular)
TOTAL: 109
---------------------------

Here we have XML3D given an advantage of 15 points. So
perhaps XML3D should be the sparting implementation when
attempting to integrate one into the other. The area where I
am having the most indecision is with each proposed
implementation's adherence to W3C standards. I simply do not
know at this point, so I gave them both the same value. But
if each one of us here give their opinion for the grade of
each criteria, we can average the results and get over with
this discussion quickly. This would allow us to reach a
consensus upon which to act in a coordinated effort.

You might be wondering how I came up with this scheme. I am
simply applying the same basic 'fuzzy' principle that my
Windows Mobile application called PocketAI 2.2 uses. Back in
2003 I think it was, I built this to help the decision
process when encountering difficult choices. I have used it
numerous times and so have countless users, and I can
honestly says that it generally works; breaking down complex
issues into smaller parts. Please see 3dneproductions.com to
download a copy if you are interested to try it for yourself
(Make sure to read the Help file so you understand how the
app works before attempting to use it. I can also email you
the above *.pai2 decision problem file if you'd like, and
provide free license key to members of this group so you can
save your own files). 

Not detailed here, is also a Boolean method of computation
that is part of the application. This also give XML3D a
slight advantage (34 to 32), but is less precise since no
weight can be asigned to the criteria. 

This is not a shameless plug but a genuine attempt at
reconcilling the issues at hand.

Cheers,
Lauren







More information about the X3D-Public mailing list