[x3d-public] [X3D-Public] Prototype

[Andreas Plesch]

Indeed, not having a PROTO node is a substantial lack of functionality in
the x3dom code base and a loss if compared with standalone x3d browsers. At
the risk of misinterpretation, to me it looks like there was conscious
decision by the x3dom developers at some early point that the certainly
very substantial cost of developing such functionality outweigh the
expected benefits. This may have changed by now, x3dom-developers ?
If not, it follows that there would be a large demand for guidance in terms
of documentation, tutorials and perhaps tools on how to convert/translate
PROTOs into x3dom compatible js code or custom x3dom nodes. I tried to
provide some initial pointers but clearly input by the x3dom group is what
is really required.
-Andreas


On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 3:00 PM, <x3d-public-request at web3d.org> wrote:

> Send x3d-public mailing list submissions to
>         x3d-public at web3d.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         x3d-public-request at web3d.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         x3d-public-owner at web3d.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of x3d-public digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: [X3D-Public] Prototype (Daniel Vera)
>    2.  SSR: server-side rendering (doug sanden)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 10:31:24 +0000
> From: Daniel Vera <d.a.vera at warwick.ac.uk>
> To: John Richardson <richards at spawar.navy.mil>
> Cc: x3d-public at web3d.org
> Subject: Re: [x3d-public] [X3D-Public] Prototype
> Message-ID: <54DDD27C.1040900 at warwick.ac.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
>
> John,
>
> Apologies for reviving an old thread, but in my opinion not having
> capability similar to VRML protos is indeed a loss of functionality;
>
> Explanation: I am an engineer (industrial production), not a developer;
> VRML PROTO/EXTERNPROTO has allowed our group to build rich 3D based
> engineering application using VRML/javascript code only (i.e. without
> the need to go in the depth of coding with low level libraries etc.).
>
> (https://www.youtube.com/user/FDSvideosFDS/videos)
>
> Looking into Andreas links (Box.js code in particular), it seems the way
> to go is to define additional X3DOM nodes, but that requires
> understanding X3DOM code, which not every class of users wants or has
> time to do; In my opinion, X3DOM should match the capability provided by
> X3D in defining complex modelling class/object using X3D/javascript
> code/syntax only.
>
> That said, I am open to additional suggestion, discussion or links to
> more information!
>
> Regards, Daniel
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/attachments/20150213/e20bafbf/attachment.html>