[x3d-public] PROTO Usefulness Question

[John Carlson]

I’m working on an example of using templates instead of Proto’s with Meteor.  I will try to get it out in the next couple of days.

John
> On Feb 24, 2016, at 3:38 PM, Leonard Daly <Leonard.Daly at realism.com> wrote:
> 
> John,
> 
>> I think the real question is, do we need some kind of Script node on the web?  With fields and routes and everything that comes with it.  This is much harder to write than a Proto Expander and much more useful.  We can avoid Proto's with an expander I'd say.  I don't think scripts are in the way of writing an expander (expander comes first), but I could be wrong.
>> 
> 
> I do no object to a PROTO expander (MACRO). I think it could be quite useful. It would allow the creation of potentially complex objects with a simple node. Used carefully, it would allow the reuse of some nodes (with DEF/USE) and allow a few nodes that need to change from occurrence to occurrence. 
> 
>> We just need some effort to bring script nodes into X3DOM.  Can we use cobweb's?
>> 
> 
> I disagree with that for two reasons:
> 
> 1) HTML/X3DOM already has scripts in the form of standard JavaScript. If you are bringing X3D into the DOM, then having two different types of scripts would be really bad. One type is normal HTML JavaScript, the other (X3D Script) requires definition of fields, automatic calls (beginning and ending of frames); and change to the event model.
> 
> 2) Cobweb does not run in the DOM. The entire set of X3D nodes is removed from DOM consideration and completely handled separately. By the time you figured out how to use Cobweb's script handling; your are close to being integrated with the DOM.
> 
> 
> The fundamental question for X3D V4 is "will it be integrated into the DOM?"
> 
> Once that is answered, then a whole lot of secondary questions are resolved and only need development work, not design work.
> 
> In case any has any doubts, my position is that X3D V4 MUST be DOM integrated.
> 
> 
> Leonard Daly
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> On Feb 24, 2016 1:03 PM, "Leonard Daly" <Leonard.Daly at realism.com <mailto:Leonard.Daly at realism.com>> wrote:
>> I asked this before but I don't think I got any answers. This is a slight rephrase of the question to help make it clearer.
>> 
>> I am looking for examples of PROTOs (either internal or external) that are
>> 1) non-trivial
>> 2) do not use one or more Script nodes
>> 
>> 
>> By (1) I mean something that does something useful that is not easy to do without using a PROTO. Something like the Universal Media PROTOs (e.g., http://www.web3d.org/x3d/content/examples/Basic/UniversalMediaMaterials/_pages/page02.html <http://www.web3d.org/x3d/content/examples/Basic/UniversalMediaMaterials/_pages/page02.html>) provide a lot of convenience to the X3D developer, but each one just defines a Material node with specific characteristics.
>> 
>> A PROTO that is used repeated in a scene providing a critical feature might be an example of something that meets (1).
>> 
>> 
>> I am asking this to determine if it is necessary or useful to have a PROTO expander (sort-of like a MACRO). The expander would not support Script nodes. If there are no examples to this question, then it indicates that PROTOs need Script node(s). Either way, this has an impact on the design of V4.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Leonard Daly
>> 3D Systems & Cloud Consultant
>> X3D Co-Chair on Sabbatical
>> LA ACM SIGGRAPH Chair
>> President, Daly Realism - Creating the Future
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> x3d-public mailing list
>> x3d-public at web3d.org <mailto:x3d-public at web3d.org>
>> http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org <http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org>
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Leonard Daly
> 3D Systems & Cloud Consultant
> X3D Co-Chair on Sabbatical
> LA ACM SIGGRAPH Chair
> President, Daly Realism - Creating the Future

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/attachments/20160224/93d333ee/attachment-0001.html>