[x3d-public] x3d-3.3-JSONSchema documentation available

[Yves Piguet]

Many thanks for these links, Don. Somme comments:

> On 6 Dec 2016, at 01:29, Don Brutzman <brutzman at nps.edu> wrote:
> 
> Documentation (generated by XML Spy) is now available with figures:
> 
> 	http://www.web3d.org/specifications/X3dJsonSchemaDocumentation3.3/x3d-3.3-JSONSchema.html

"connect" is missing from this list; it can only be found in the description of "IS". I don't know it it's intended.

> More about X3D JSON Encoding can be found at
> 
> 	http://www.web3d.org/wiki/index.php/X3D_JSON_Encoding

Section http://www.web3d.org/wiki/index.php/X3D_JSON_Encoding#Standardization states "The most probable place to put it is as a new Part 5 to ISO/IEC 19776. In this manner, it would correspond to the XML, Classic VRML, and Compressed Binary encodings". Will there be a part 4?

Is there a rationale available for two distinct prefixes "@" and "-"? Except for a closer match to the XML encoding, but I would humbly object to that: per http://www.web3d.org/documents/specifications/19775-1/V3.3/Part01/concepts.html#Dataencodings "concrete data encodings for X3D shall conform to this abstract specification" (in ISO/IEC 19775), so peculiarities of one encoding shouldn't be inherited by another one. Or the JSON encoding should be clearly defined as a sub-encoding of the XML encoding.

Is there a rationale available for a prefix in front of some (e.g. "@protoField"), but not all (e.g. "connect") the properties of elements which are not X3D nodes?

> Upcoming X3D Working Group review efforts include consideration of
> 
> 	Initial working draft:  X3D JSON Encoding
> 	ISO-IEC 19776-5 V3.3 WD1/
> 	https://github.com/Web3DConsortium/X3D/tree/master/ISO-IEC%2019776/ISO-IEC%2019776-5/ISO-IEC%2019776-5%20V3.3

404 for non-members :(

Thanks,

Yves