[x3d-public] ] V4.0 Opendiscussion/workshopon X3DHTMLintegration

[Joe D Williams]

> Hi Joe,
>
> I thought we could have meaningful discussion about the different
> approaches, which could help all of us to come up with a better
> understanding and finally a better architecture.

Great, the architecture I am interested in the the architecture of the 
Humanoid. It consist of various types of data. If we are talking about 
the same thing, that is skeletal animation using segment geometry and 
skin, then we should be able to talk about user code for skeletons and 
skin and animations.

When we use skeletal animation to animate skin, then we assume the 
author wants to document the mesh to actuator bindings. If you don't 
need this data for a style of animation you are using then that is 
fine and please tell me how you are doing it. If you do support this 
style of joint-driven animation then where does the author put that 
mesh binding information.

Maybe I am being difficult, but from what you have shown me i said 
before and you did not refute, I still am guessing that you may be 
animating what I call a Level 2 export from some authoring tool. Level 
2 is when the data for the skeleton and animation system is not there 
and the export is just flattest possible geometries for each frame. 
Then you just cycle through the geometry frames like it was really 
animated. If that is true, then x3d deals with that just fine in a 
very systematic way of just swapping all geometry each frame. But that 
is not the topic of hanim because h-anim deals primarily with skeletal 
animation progressing frame to frame. What I call Level 1 export gives 
you all geometry, data, and event system needed to create the animated 
scene. Level 3 export is a video where all scenegraph information is 
lost.

Well, as I am asking, where is the skeleton and where is the mesh and 
the bindings.
How can I take conrol of the animations?

> But it seems you do not really care what others have to say.

Maybe I have ignored something you have written. All fine stuffs but 
the topic I want to chase is what are your recommended style of user 
code for the process of skeletal animations. If you do enough of it 
and want to reuse some of it I'm sure you will have some preferences 
for names and structures for getting data into the user code. 
Admittedly X3D HAnim has a very narrow scope in this area but the 
elements in that scope are essential for basic operation of the 
humanoid.

Of course this basic humanoid could be composed and operated without 
giving special names to parts of it and there may be other ways of 
moving skin around, maybe even without a skeleton - that's the way 
they used to do it. But just please tell me how I use your tool to get 
basic results.

> Most of your questions would
> already be answered by a simple look into our papers.

I guess you have no questions or comments about the 'standard' hanim 
character I sent.
The main reason you might read it is just to see how hanim documents 
the structures and parameters.

I did actually look and read the example you referenced. Sorry that 
all I am asking is not answered on that one page of user code. I am 
sure there are pages of code behind that page but I could not find 
working links. How about just these questions below? I am just asking 
for some simple guidance. The page you showed did not contain these 
details, at least in a form that I could recognize and understand.

>>
>> skeleton hierarchy

can you please show me the parts that define the parent-child 
relationships of the various parts of the skeleton. Since I want to 
deal with aspects of skeletal animation then I want to know how to 
target specific joints or whatever is used in your system to connect 
with other structures. If your process uses a skeleton hierarchy (some 
don't) then I should be able define my skeleton in the style of your 
user code.

>> joint center locations

these are important parameters of the model. Again, I think I need to 
position the joints in 3D space in order to drive the segment or skin 
geometry.

>> before animation pose

what is the default skeleton pose prior to animation.
My existing animations may depend upon a certain starting pose

>> before animation joint rotations

another important parameter for sharing skeletons and animations

>> segment geometries
>> skin geometry

Where is the mesh defined in the user code? Not on that page you 
showed me,

>> skin vertex to joint bindings

I think this is a vital block of data. I must know which joints affect 
which points of the skin.
Show me the mesh and binding to animated elements. I am not interested 
really in the techniques of the runtime, just how the humanoid 
skeleton and skin is documented.

The purpose of X3D is not the style of runtime since many styles are 
possible,
The purpose of X3D is reliable documentation for transport.

>
> I am more than happy to answer meaningful questions but why should I
> repeat the paper's content here just because you do not care to read 
> it?

How about because you a polite guy with a mission and want to help 
even though I am having problems?
Did you send me a link for the paper?
"Cam you Please show me the mesh?" is not a meaningless question? It 
may be lazy for me not looking harder but the question is not 
meaningless.

Why should I have to read the paper (which I probably have seen at 
some point but don't recall coverage of hanim specifically mentioned) 
for you to tell me where in the user code for your hanim example do 
you stash skeleton joint hierachy and the skin bindings?

I shoudn't talk like this but this is like the old days when character 
rigging and all the various tricks were used to hide and obscure code 
because no one wanted to give away their rigging and skinning secrets. 
Maybe that is what is happening here where this basic stuff is really 
not for the eyes of a casual reader that might stand at least some 
chamce of understanding the thing.

The hanim character I showed is nothing so great, all hand-done with a 
text editor but it works by the spec, the skeleton is orderly, the 
mesh is obvious, and the animation is straightforward. It should not 
be too difficult to make it work in your system. But I gotta know 
where the data goes before I try it. So please guide me through the 
places where the data that is needed would be placed.

>
>
> Best,
>
> Philipp

Thanks Philipp. I am somewhat limited in what I can do but if you have 
anything, even a rough template style for skeletal animation projects, 
I would like to try it.

All Best,
Joe


>
> Am 13.06.2016 um 18:10 schrieb Joe D Williams:
>>>> ... this generic data design also allows  ... the specialized
>>>> approach that X3D is based on
>>
>> That is what I hope to hear anyway. X3D does use a generically
>> specialized approach because it is aimed at a specific application. 
>> So
>> here are some categories of data required to create the humanoid 
>> and
>> animations.
>>
>> skeleton hierarchy
>> joint center locations
>> segment lengths
>> before animation pose
>> before animation joint rotations
>> segment geometries
>> skin geometry
>> skin vertex to joint bindings
>>
>> So, the x3d hanim data design is pure 3D database. Easy to build 
>> from
>> a spreadsheet. For the skeleton, there is a base joint, then 
>> segments
>> connect to other joints in a system of parent-child so the thing 
>> moves
>> as expected by rotations applied to joints. The only reason I can
>> think of why they called the bones segments instead of bones is
>> because this type of chained animations using
>> anchorjoint-segment-joint-segment-(etc.)-endeffector structures is
>> very common over many fields as well as humanoid simulation. Also 
>> this
>> 3D structure gives some handles to attach physics elements.
>>
>> In x3d, the segment geometries are children of the segment so when 
>> the
>> segment moves because the joint is rotated, then the geometry 
>> moves.
>> So, in the x3d data model the animated geometry is defined in the
>> children user code of the segment it represents, This should be 
>> fairly
>> standard way of including geometry for the character.
>>
>> In x3d the segment lengths are not given directly, instead it is a
>> computed distance between parent and child joints (or parent joint 
>> and
>> end effector).
>>
>> In x3d the before animation skeleton pose is sort of a relaxed
>> attention pose, with all joints at the default rotation, facing +z,
>> with +y up, with 0 0 0 at the standing surface between the feet. 
>> This
>> is the animation binding pose which may be different than the skin
>> binding pose.
>>
>> The base joint for the skeleton is about crotch level, maybe center 
>> of
>> gravity standing, Then the x y z of joint centers are also set
>> relative to 0 0 0. The hanim example typical skeleton dimensions 
>> are
>> from a large sample and include a collection of surface features, 
>> such
>> as an xyz location for the top of the head. So the complete 
>> important
>> dimensions of the skeleton are stored as an attribute of each Joint
>> node. There may be other ways to do this but this seems convenient 
>> and
>> is basically what all authoring tools do.
>>
>> If the animation includes a deformable mesh, then each vertex of 
>> the
>> skin geometry needs to be hooked up with one or more joint nodes 
>> that
>> are responsible for controlling displacment of each skin vertex as 
>> the
>> skeleton joints are rotated. The skin geometry is defined as a 
>> child
>> of the humanoid so all moves when the base joint moves and each
>> individual vertex of the skin moves according to rotation of
>> associated joint(s). So the skin is defined as a single mesh that 
>> may
>> be composed from individual geometries.
>>
>> The binding of each vertex to one or more joints is given in each
>> Joint node by listing the number of the vertex in its order of
>> appearance in the skin geomery definition, along with a weight that
>> allows computation of the radial displacement to move the vertex as
>> the associated joint(s)are rotated. So, the individual joint nodes
>> hold skin binding and weight data, I guess there could be other 
>> ways
>> of cooding this, like frestanding list of each vertex and its
>> controlling joints but that path was not chosen.
>>
>> Seem complex? Well how else can it be done? You must know complete
>> details about the skeleton and skin or else, no luck or turn it 
>> over
>> to a black box. If you use this sort of technology, then this is 
>> what
>> it takes to document the techniques.
>>
>> In x3d standard, the animation is given by listing the controls, 
>> such
>> as touch and time sensors. For each joint to be animated an
>> orientation interpolator or script along with a list of routes that
>> describe the flow of time to each interpolator and the result from
>> each interpolator to the Joint it controls.  completes the 
>> animation
>> event system,
>>
>> So that is my version of how the hanim character 'rigging; and
>> animation data is presented as user code. Especially in hanim there
>> really aren't many abstractions. It is very concrete because the 
>> model
>> wants to be as complete and realistic as possible.
>>
>> again > Hanim has
>>> selected one specific way of describing and handling animation and
>>> skinning, which requires a node-specific implementation.
>>
>> No, you just have to recognize the node and know what to do with 
>> the
>> data.
>> Animation is usually keyframe interpolation, meaning a set of data
>> that includes a list of times and a list of what the data should be 
>> at
>> that time. The idea is that if you need to create the scene at some
>> point between the keytimes, then linear interpolation berween 
>> adjacent
>> key data can be computed. This is the way all does realtime. There 
>> can
>> be some differences that simpify if you just wanna make a video. 
>> But
>> again, if you need interplators, there are not many easier or more
>> straightforward deflcative way to define user code for a keyframe
>> interpolator.
>>
>> As for skinning, maybe you would rather have a separate container 
>> that
>> just lists each vertex and and the elements that control it. What 
>> is a
>> better way to document this connection than the way it is done in 
>> x3d
>> hanim?
>>
>> And yes, skeleton has at its core a node specific implementation 
>> that
>> contains the hierarchy of joints. It is important to define the
>> hieratchy in the user code so it can be verified against a 
>> 'standard'
>> hierarchy which is part of figuring out whether the character can 
>> do
>> 'standard' animations, for example.
>>
>> So it is just a matter of names of functionality and the data for 
>> that
>> functionality. And the not small matter of putting that 
>> functionality
>> in a structure and syntax so that the data can be easily read,
>> analyzed, and maybe extracted in a 'standard' form and used 
>> according
>> to processing styles of the supporting 3D application. HAnim made a
>> giant step forward when back in the day they decided to put the
>> complete skeleton model and all the data to run the thing directly 
>> and
>> unambigiously in the user code. This made the model concrete and
>> verifiable as well as personal. Before that all they could do was
>> submit lists of elements and data to the big hanim simulator in the
>> sky and it would would send back results.
>>
>> Some built-in convenience nodes are certainly needed at some point. 
>> Is
>> here a simple way to define keyframe interpolation or do I start 
>> with
>> a script template that depends upon dom events?
>>
>> Thanks and Best,
>> Joe
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe D Williams" 
>> <joedwil at earthlink.net>
>> To: "doug sanden" <highaspirations at hotmail.com>; "'X3D Graphics 
>> public
>> mailing list'" <x3d-public at web3d.org>; "Philipp Slusallek"
>> <philipp.slusallek at dfki.de>
>> Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2016 3:59 PM
>> Subject: Re: [x3d-public] ] V4.0 Opendiscussion/workshopon
>> X3DHTMLintegration
>>
>>
>> Hi, Philipp,
>>
>>> https://xml3d.github.io/xml3d-examples/examples/xflowSkin/xflow-skin.html
>>> for
>>> simple skinned and animated characters
>>
>> I don't see it. There are things jumping around, but from code 
>> think
>> not skeletons with skin but just geometries dragged from frame to
>> frame. Maybe the code is in the protos? Looks like it could be
>> generated by something that used skeletal animation but just 
>> exported
>> geometry for some keyframes. Anyway, I can't find the desired
>> interfaces, like how is the skeleton composed, how is the skin 
>> bound,
>> how do I control the animations, do my personal animations stand a
>> chance of working in those rigs? All the questions I consider basic
>> are not there or very far down in the reading. So show me the code 
>> for
>> a skeleton, please,
>>
>> From the spec, It is important that the skeleton be well defined in
>> terms of names, locations, and interfaces. To me, the great thing
>> about the x3d representation is clarity about the naming and 
>> location
>> of features, and even an initial pose so that animations can be 
>> easily
>> transported between characters.
>>
>>> Hanim has
>>> selected one specific way of describing and handling animation and
>>> skinning, which requires a node-specific implementation.
>>
>> Right, hanim documented the best practices for handling skeleton, 
>> and
>> animation, and skinning, I mean for years x3d does it the same way
>> because these are the parameters for the way that everybody does 
>> it.
>>
>> So, it started long ago with the idea that researchers needed a
>> standardized skeleton that would serve for producing a computable
>> replacement for a mechanical armature in humanoid simulations. With
>> medical and robotic folks also involved, they decided to pick a
>> realistic representation that was widely accepted. The hanim and 
>> X3D
>> standards use as the example a 'standard' humanoid with 'typical'
>> dimensions in a realistic humanoid hierarchy, This was easy for 
>> VRML
>> and X3D with a Humanoid container holding skeleton and skin and 
>> some
>> other stuffs.
>>
>> Skeleton is realistic hierarchy of Joints, Segments, and Sites.
>> Defining the default initial pose was not easy but finally, the 
>> choice
>> was probably an artifact of the method used to obtain the greatast
>> share of samples to define typical joint and surface feature
>> locations. Anyway, some of the names have changed (segment instead 
>> of
>> bone) and some under the covers stuffs exposed, but basically x3d
>> hanim is indusry-standard best practices for complete documentation 
>> of
>> a realtime animated character.
>>
>> Later this has evolved for skeleton structures to serve as the 
>> basic
>> model for motion capture data and as the corresponding structure 
>> for
>> the mocap playback model.
>>
>> I mean, this hanim has been the world standard for transportablity 
>> of
>> basic structures and basic functionality. Wouldn't you expect to 
>> get
>> something that represents the core factors for what most all 
>> realtime
>> character animation tools would give you when you start with any
>> default (fantasitc that there are now so many) humanoid or biped or
>> something of that category? Of course, and that is true. See X3D 
>> HAnim
>> LOA2. Some names are changed, but that is the generic skeleton.
>>
>> The names may be changed or some hidden interfaces exposed, but if 
>> you
>> look close you will see that x3d hanim does indeed represent 
>> complete
>> documentation required to build and animate the character. That can 
>> be
>> important when you wish to carry your work from one commercial or 
>> open
>> product to another. I mean you used to have to beg for binding and
>> animation curves. At some authoring levels sometimes you can't even
>> see that stuff.
>>
>> Whatever the authoring system internal data forms, if they rig 
>> skin,
>> then there may or may not be a human readable and kestroke editable
>> listing of the skin vertex bindings and weights. X3D just says that
>> this very basic stuff has to be in the flie in a logical place and
>> reasonable form. Any authoring system worthy of your trust should 
>> be
>> able to give you that list just in case you wanted to work with
>> another tool and use your old rigging. Why is it so carefully 
>> defined
>> in x3d hanim? Because that is the best way to preserve that type of
>> data since basically, everybody has to do it that way down at the
>> metal, to move the points ro positions that depend upon what time
>> appears in the next frame.
>>
>> That's just way it is. The basic data in close to executable form
>> readable and editable is what x3d hanim requires. Since it is so
>> basic, data should be able to be exchanged between most any set of
>> authoring tools and it is. Of course there might be some new
>> technique(s) because the things advance, but those techniques 
>> either
>> remain proprietary of have not yet made it into the public open 
>> source
>> community so would ot appear in X3D.
>>
>> No outright challenge here but look at what you get when you start
>> with the default humanoid in any authoring system. Some might hook 
>> up
>> the joints slightly differently with other names or use some other
>> space than 'standard' hanim humanoid space but the basic goal is
>> realism, Hey, I think best results when everything is drawn in
>> 'standard' human space, dimensioned for your preferences. Like the
>> hanim end-effector surface features are there because experimeters
>> wanted to be able to define an actual location in human space 
>> relative
>> to the skeleton. That was where the virtual doctor could touch the
>> virtual surgical tool. Anyway, by the time the standard was set, it
>> was pretty much decided that real machines would use quats to 
>> anmate
>> but X3D stayed with axis-angle as the minimum requirement for
>> transporting realtime animations (realtime always needs 
>> interpolators
>> and all inbetweens, so sorry euler angles).
>>
>> A Transform extended to a Joint adds some technical features and 
>> the
>> hierarchal structure of Joint, connecting Segment, and Site(s) for
>> surface and internal features are all standard vrml/x3d. Using the
>> names Humanoid. Joint, Segment, and Site as names for the major
>> functionalities of the basic humanoid with geometries bound to
>> segments is accomplished by extending Transform using simple
>> prototypes. To do the skin needs some pretty standard gem script to
>> move the skin points as the skeleton is animated .
>>
>> I mean that all the information about mesh and binding and what is
>> supposed to happen when it is supposed to happen is very nicely
>> composed. Of course x3d hanim is always interested in new names and
>> locations and styles or techniques that are missing from anywhere 
>> in
>> x3d, but basically it is all there. This reflects the data that is
>> actually used to create the character and realtime animations in
>> human-readable form. And it matches up with detailed vizualization
>> technolofies like medical and cad and physics and is completely
>> collada friendly.
>>
>> As I said, the example I am interested in exploring is relatively
>> simple and from what I have seen (with conversion from axis-angle 
>> to
>> unitquats) can probably be represented lossless in glTF.
>>
>>> But this generic data design also allows for creating these
>>> abstractions that would be much harder (if not impossible) to do
>>> with
>>> the specialized approach that X3D is based on.
>>
>> X3D is a generic data design because it defines generic forms of 
>> data
>> needed to make and animate a common character. The data is indeed
>> generic and no character animation that can produce animated
>> characters is missing any of this data. Absent proprietary 
>> technology
>> they all use a skeleton and they all have geometry bound to 
>> connecting
>> things, and they all use the same skin bindings.
>>
>> What is specialized? The names and hierarchy? Well the names are
>> probably specialized but the hierarchy and bindings are not. If i 
>> read
>> the above right, then _if_ the generic data design has hard times 
>> with
>> the x3d approach of containing the data then the generic data 
>> design
>> has big problems. I don't think that is what you said, but what 
>> part
>> of the x3d data design is harder? Overall, the hanim is a very 
>> generic
>> data design using very generic 3D hierarchies. Hanim is not at all 
>> an
>> unusual or non-generic scenegraph structure or data structure so I
>> don't understand the problem.
>>
>> Besides, please look at some browsers that do a great job with x3d
>> hanim. There were several more before they went missing.
>>
>> http://www.hypermultimedia.com/x3d/hanim/JoeH-AnimKick1a.txt
>>
>> is the text version of the example I am most interested in, in 
>> classic
>> encoding because I thinki is easier to read. Don't use word wrap.
>>
>> In reality, I don't care how the data is stored for runtime 
>> execution,
>> I care about the readability of the documentation created at
>> authortime. Sure, X3D HAnim may take a while to learn to read 
>> because
>> the structure is complicated, but all time is not wasted because 
>> these
>> are types of data common to most all efforts of humanoid animation.
>>
>> One piece of automation also used in character animation is 
>> precise,
>> time-driven animation of parts of a geometry, like when a piece of
>> skin to move independently of any joint rotations, In HAnim this is
>> done by Displacer, You tell it which points to move and how much to
>> move them then send it a weight, This is an important little tool.
>> Again, the data and technique just represents a common way to do 
>> it.
>> How would your project define such as operation?
>>
>> Thanks and Best,
>> Joe
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Philipp Slusallek"
>> <philipp.slusallek at dfki.de>
>> To: "Joe D Williams" <joedwil at earthlink.net>; "doug sanden"
>> <highaspirations at hotmail.com>; "'X3D Graphics public mailing list'"
>> <x3d-public at web3d.org>
>> Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2016 12:21 AM
>> Subject: Re: [x3d-public]] V4.0 Opendiscussion/workshopon X3DHTML
>> integration
>>
>>
>>> Hi Joe,
>>>
>>> I believe it may even be illuminating to just read a paper to
>>> understand
>>> the principles of other technologies and consider them for your 
>>> own
>>> design. Also, some more openness to other available technology
>>> besides
>>> X3D would actually help the discussion here.
>>>
>>> But we actually do have an implementation as well, which is used 
>>> in
>>> many
>>> of our projects: See for example
>>> https://xml3d.github.io/xml3d-examples/examples/xflowSkin/xflow-skin.html
>>> for
>>> simple skinned and animated characters that are handled using 
>>> Xflow
>>> to
>>> describe the required processing on the triangle meshes. These are
>>> animated characters exported to XML3D/Xflow directly from a
>>> well-known game.
>>>
>>> This is just one of many ways of how Xflow can be used. Really, 
>>> the
>>> main
>>> point of Xflow is the ability to describe very different 
>>> processing
>>> operations on various data sets in a scene in a declarative way.
>>> There
>>> are also examples for image processing (e.g.
>>> https://xml3d.github.io/xml3d-examples/examples/xflowIP/histogramm.html),
>>> simple
>>> Augmented Reality
>>> (https://xml3d.github.io/xml3d-examples/examples/xflowAR/ar_flying_teapot.html),
>>>
>>> and others using the exact same basic technique. Our ongoing work
>>> will
>>> make this even simpler and support different HW mappings better.
>>>
>>> This is made possible by the generic data model in XML3D that I 
>>> have
>>> alluded to several times in my email. It is already useful as nice
>>> abstraction of GPU buffers but also allows for supporting
>>> programmable
>>> shading. But this generic data design also allows for creating 
>>> these
>>> abstractions that would be much harder (if not impossible) to do
>>> with
>>> the specialized approach that X3D is based on. However, it does 
>>> work
>>> the
>>> other way round: You can map the specialized nodes of X3D to the
>>> more
>>> general and generic functionality of XML3D/Xflow.
>>>
>>> I think this highlights the difference between our approaches: 
>>> Hanim
>>> has
>>> selected one specific way of describing and handling animation and
>>> skinning, which requires a node-specific implementation. On the
>>> other
>>> hand, we provide a small core engine for any such processing and
>>> expose
>>> it in a compact and declarative way. The engine can then analyze 
>>> and
>>> optimize the resulting flow-graph, optimize it, and map it to the
>>> available HW independent of what the specific computation and up
>>> representing. On top of this, one can then use WebComponents to 
>>> map
>>> any
>>> specific representation (such as Hanim) to this generic
>>> representation.
>>>
>>> We also did a careful analysis and comparison to X3D/Hanim in our
>>> papers
>>> (see below for the links). There are several issues that we
>>> identify:
>>> Need to duplicate the geometry to apply different animations to 
>>> the
>>> same
>>> model, or the fact that Hanim cannot handle tangent vectors as 
>>> part
>>> of
>>> the model, which may be required if a model has anisotropic
>>> materials
>>> that need the transformed tangent vectors as vertex attributes for
>>> the
>>> shader. It is very straight forward to add such processing to an
>>> Xflow
>>> graph. There are more arguments in the paper.
>>>
>>> We also argue in the paper that Xflow is expressive enough to 
>>> handle
>>> Hanim. Doing a full WebComponent implementation for Hanim is left 
>>> as
>>> an
>>> exercise for the reader :-). While certainly useful, we do not see
>>> this
>>> as the main target of our research work, sorry. But it should not 
>>> be
>>> a
>>> difficult exercise.
>>>
>>> BTW, the relevant papers are here:
>>> -- 
>>> https://graphics.cg.uni-saarland.de/fileadmin/cguds/papers/2012/klein_web3d2012/xflow.pdf
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> https://graphics.cg.uni-saarland.de/fileadmin/cguds/papers/2013/klein_web3d2013/xflow-ar.pdf
>>>
>>>
>>> There is also a IEEE CG&A extended version of the first paper 
>>> here:
>>> -- https://www.computer.org/csdl/mags/cg/2013/05/mcg2013050038.pdf
>>>
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Philipp
>>>
>>> Am 12.06.2016 um 05:52 schrieb Joe D Williams:
>>>> Hi Philipp,
>>>>
>>>> I would study some of your work, but please help me esablish this
>>>> confidence by showing me what you can do with some relatively
>>>> complex
>>>> X3D. This is skeleton animation of joints and segments as used
>>>> everywhere (no matter which interfaces are actually exposed by 
>>>> the
>>>> authoring system) and a deformable mesh skin bound to the 
>>>> skeleton
>>>> and
>>>> each skin vertex bound to one or more joint(s) nodes.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.web3d.org/documents/specifications/19774/V1.0/HAnim/ObjectInterfaces.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Skin animation is achieved by animating the joints in the
>>>> skeleton's
>>>> joint hierarachy then weighting each skin vertex displacement
>>>> according
>>>> to the bound joint(s) rotation (as used everywhere no matter 
>>>> which
>>>> interfaces are actually exposed by the authoring system).
>>>>
>>>> some basics are here:
>>>>
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skeletal_animation
>>>>
>>>> is pretty much what X3D does either/both segment geometry (none 
>>>> on
>>>> this
>>>> model) or skin, like this one, and represents complete
>>>> documentation of
>>>> the model rigging and animations. Relative to the rest of the 
>>>> world
>>>> of
>>>> character authoring and animation X3D covers a lot of ground. The
>>>> only
>>>> 'probem' I know X3D has is that we do not use quaterions for 
>>>> joint
>>>> animation, which is now more or less industry glTF standard 
>>>> instead
>>>> of
>>>> axis-angle used here. Well, also see that while the interpolators
>>>> are
>>>> linear, the keytimes may not always be constant intervals.
>>>>
>>>> A couple of X3D browsers will do this fine and BSContact free is 
>>>> my
>>>> reference.
>>>>
>>>> This is a 'standard' LOA3 skeleton with skin vertices mostly 
>>>> taken
>>>> from
>>>> 'standard' surface feature points. Both skeleton and skin are 
>>>> drawn
>>>> in
>>>> approximately human scale, using the spec example dimensions as a
>>>> basis.
>>>> I use an IndexedFaceSet for the skin mesh and depend upon the
>>>> 'standard'
>>>> X3D browser feature of IFS to generate a default texure map so 
>>>> the
>>>> texture stays bound to the skin as it moves.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, I hope you can take a look at this because implementation
>>>> of
>>>> this basic character animation stuff is really not that easy and 
>>>> in
>>>> the
>>>> past we have seen X3D browser development stall at implementation
>>>> of
>>>> skeleton based skin animation. Note the hanim displacer node also
>>>> does
>>>> mesh deformation.
>>>>
>>>> Example is here:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.hypermultimedia.com/x3d/hanim/JoeH-AnimKick1a.x3dv
>>>>
>>>> and attached.
>>>>
>>>> I can get it in .x3d but this version has better documentation of
>>>> the
>>>> skin-joint bindings.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks and Best,
>>>> Joe
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Philipp Slusallek"
>>>> <philipp.slusallek at dfki.de>
>>>> To: "Joe D Williams" <joedwil at earthlink.net>; "doug sanden"
>>>> <highaspirations at hotmail.com>; "'X3D Graphics public mailing 
>>>> list'"
>>>> <x3d-public at web3d.org>
>>>> Sent: Saturday, June 11, 2016 3:17 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: [x3d-public] [x3d] V4.0 Opendiscussion/workshopon
>>>> X3DHTML
>>>> integration
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Joe,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the good discussion.
>>>>>
>>>>> But may I humbly suggest that you read our Xflow papers. We have
>>>>> looked
>>>>> at this problem very carefully and tried different options with
>>>>> Xflow as
>>>>> the result of this. Xflow describes a generic data modeling and
>>>>> processing framework as a direct extension to HTML. It is even
>>>>> independent of XML3D conceptually. I would even call it the most
>>>>> important parts of our system.
>>>>>
>>>>> Its data representation is very close to GPU buffers (by design)
>>>>> and we
>>>>> have shown that it can be mapped efficiently to very different
>>>>> acceleration API (including plain JS, asm.js, ParallelJS, vertex
>>>>> shaders, and others).The reason is that it is a pure functional
>>>>> design
>>>>> that is hard to do with X3D Routes for various reasons 
>>>>> (discussed
>>>>> in the
>>>>> papers).
>>>>>
>>>>> Morphing, skinning, and image processing were actually the first
>>>>> examples that we showed how to do with the system. Hanim can be
>>>>> easily
>>>>> mapped to Xflow (e.g. by a WebComponent), from where it can take
>>>>> advantage of the generic HW acceleration without any further
>>>>> coding. All
>>>>> that is left on the JS side is a bit of bookkeeping, attribute
>>>>> updates,
>>>>> and the WebGL calls.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And with regard to the need of native implementations as raised 
>>>>> by
>>>>> you
>>>>> earlier: On a plain PC we could do something like 40-50 (would
>>>>> have to
>>>>> check the exact number) fairly detailed animated characters, 
>>>>> each
>>>>> with
>>>>> their own morphing and skinning in a single scene in pure JS, 
>>>>> even
>>>>> WITHOUT ANY ACCELERATION AT ALL, including rendering and all 
>>>>> other
>>>>> stuff. Yes, faster and more efficient is always better, but (i) 
>>>>> we
>>>>> should not do any premature optimizations unless we can show 
>>>>> that
>>>>> it
>>>>> would actually make a big difference and (ii) this will not be
>>>>> easy as
>>>>> you should not underestimate the performance of JS with really
>>>>> good JIT
>>>>> compiler and well-formed code.
>>>>>
>>>>> Unless we have SHOWN that there is a real problem, that JS 
>>>>> CANNOT
>>>>> be
>>>>> pushed further AND there is sufficient significant interest by a
>>>>> large
>>>>> user base, the browser vendors will not even talk to us about a
>>>>> native
>>>>> implementation. And maintaining a fork is really, really hard --
>>>>> trust
>>>>> me that is where we started :-(.
>>>>>
>>>>> And even more importantly, when we should ever get there we 
>>>>> should
>>>>> better have an implementation core that is as small as possible.
>>>>> Many
>>>>> node types each with its own implementation is not the right
>>>>> design for
>>>>> that (IMHO). Something like Xflow that many nodes and routes 
>>>>> could
>>>>> be
>>>>> mapped to seems, a much more useful and maintainable option.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Right now we are extending shade.js in a project with Intel to
>>>>> also
>>>>> handle the Xflow processing algorithms to be more general, which
>>>>> should
>>>>> allow us to have a single code that targets all possible
>>>>> acceleration
>>>>> targets. Right now you still need separate implementations for
>>>>> each
>>>>> target.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Philipp
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 10.06.2016 um 19:26 schrieb Joe D Williams:
>>>>>>> e6 html integration > route/event/timer
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These are details solved declaratively using .x3d using the
>>>>>> abstractions
>>>>>> of node event in and outs, timesensors, routes, interpolators,
>>>>>> shaders,
>>>>>> and Script directOuts...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> in the <x3d> ... </x3d> environment, everything hat is not
>>>>>> 'built-in' is
>>>>>> created programatically using 'built-in' event emitters, event
>>>>>> listeners, event processors, time devices, scripts, etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So the big difference in event systems might be that in .html 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> time
>>>>>> answers what time was it in the world when you last checked the
>>>>>> time,
>>>>>> while in ,x3d it is the time to use in creation of the next
>>>>>> frame. So
>>>>>> this declarative vs programatic just sets a low limit on how 
>>>>>> much
>>>>>> animation automation ought to be included. Both .x3d and <x3d>
>>>>>> ,,,
>>>>>> </x3d> should preserve the basic event graph declarations.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This brings up where to stash these organizable lists of routes
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> interpolators.
>>>>>> The user code of .html is not really designed for these 
>>>>>> detailed
>>>>>> constructions and its basic premise is that the document should
>>>>>> contain
>>>>>> content, not massses of markup. So, are timers and 
>>>>>> interpolators
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> routes as used in .x3d content or markup? If they are markup,
>>>>>> then it is
>>>>>> clear they should be in style. Besides, in my trusty text 
>>>>>> editor
>>>>>> this
>>>>>> gives me a easily read independent event graph to play with.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Next, if I need to step outside the 'built-in' convenience
>>>>>> abstractions,
>>>>>> or simply to communicate with other players in the DOM which
>>>>>> happens to
>>>>>> be the current embeddiment of my <x3d> ,,, </x3d> then I need 
>>>>>> DOM
>>>>>> event
>>>>>> stuffs and probably a DOM script to deal with DOM events set on
>>>>>> x3d
>>>>>> syntax.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, to me this is the first step: Decide how much of the
>>>>>> automation is
>>>>>> actually included within <x3d> ... </x3d>?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe one example is x3d hanim where we define real skin 
>>>>>> vertices
>>>>>> bound
>>>>>> to real joints to achieve realistic deformable skin. In HAnim 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> first
>>>>>> level of animation complexity is a realistic skeleton of joints
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> simple binding of shapes to segments in a heirarchy where joint
>>>>>> center
>>>>>> rotations can produce realitic movements of the skeleton. As a
>>>>>> joint
>>>>>> center rotates then its children segments and joints move as
>>>>>> expected
>>>>>> for the skeleton dynamics. For seamless animations across 
>>>>>> segment
>>>>>> shapes, then the technique is to bind each skin vertex to one 
>>>>>> or
>>>>>> more
>>>>>> joint objects, then move the skin some weighted displacement as
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> joint(s) center(s) rotates.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To document this completely in human-readable and editable 
>>>>>> form,
>>>>>> as is
>>>>>> the goal of .x3d HAnim, is very tedious, but that is exactly 
>>>>>> how
>>>>>> it is
>>>>>> actually finally computed in the wide world of rigging and in
>>>>>> computationally intensive. Thus, it makes sense for <x3d> ...
>>>>>> </x3d> to
>>>>>> support shapes bound to segments that are children of joints 
>>>>>> but
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> demand full support for deformable skin. Hopefully the 
>>>>>> javascript
>>>>>> programmers that are now building the basic foundations to
>>>>>> support x3d
>>>>>> using webgl features will prove me wrong, but without very high
>>>>>> performance support for reasonable density deformable skin, 
>>>>>> this
>>>>>> does
>>>>>> not need to be supported in the (2.) html environment. Of 
>>>>>> course
>>>>>> standalone and embeddable players can do this because they will
>>>>>> have
>>>>>> access to the high performance code and acceleration that may 
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> be
>>>>>> available in .html with webgl.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for thinking about this stuff.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Joe
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.hypermultimedia.com/x3d/hanim/hanimLOA3A8320130611Allanimtests.x3dv
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.hypermultimedia.com/x3d/hanim/hanimLOA3A8320130611Allanimtests.txt
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.hypermultimedia.com/x3d/hanim/JoeH-AnimKick1a.x3dv
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "doug sanden"
>>>>>> <highaspirations at hotmail.com>
>>>>>> To: "'X3D Graphics public mailing list'" <x3d-public at web3d.org>
>>>>>> Sent: Friday, June 10, 2016 7:03 AM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [x3d-public] [x3d] V4.0 Opendiscussion/workshopon
>>>>>> X3DHTML
>>>>>> integration
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3-step 'Creative Strategy'
>>>>>> http://cup.columbia.edu/book/creative-strategy/9780231160520
>>>>>> https://sites.google.com/site/airdrieinnovationinstitute/creative-strategy
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. break it down (into problem elements)
>>>>>> 2. search (other domains for element solutions)
>>>>>> 3. recombine (element solutions into total solution)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> e - problem element
>>>>>> d - domain offering solution(s) to problem elements
>>>>>> e-d matrix
>>>>>> ______d1________d2______d3__________d4
>>>>>> e1
>>>>>> e2
>>>>>> e3
>>>>>> e4
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Applied to what I think is the overall problem: 'which v4
>>>>>> technologies/specifications' or 'gaining consensus on v4 before
>>>>>> siggraph'.
>>>>>> I don't know if that's the only problem or _the_ problem, so 
>>>>>> this
>>>>>> will
>>>>>> be more of an exercise to see if Creative Strategy works in the
>>>>>> real
>>>>>> world, by using what I can piece together from what your're
>>>>>> saying as an
>>>>>> example.
>>>>>> Then I'll leave it to you guys to go through the 3 steps for
>>>>>> whatever
>>>>>> the true problems are.
>>>>>> Problem: v4 specification finalization
>>>>>> Step1 break it down:
>>>>>> e1 continuity/stability in changing/shifting and multiplying
>>>>>> target
>>>>>> technologies
>>>>>> e2 html integration > protos
>>>>>> e3 html integration > proto scripts
>>>>>> e4 html integration > inline vs Dom
>>>>>> e5 html integration > node/component simplification
>>>>>> e6 html integration > route/event/timer
>>>>>> e7 html integration > feature simplification ie SAI
>>>>>> e8 siggraph promotion opportunity, among/against competing 3D
>>>>>> formats /
>>>>>> tools
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Step 2 search other domains
>>>>>> d1 compiler domain > take a high-level cross platform language
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> compile it for target CPU ARM, x86, x64
>>>>>> d2 wrangling: opengl extension wrangler domain > add extensions
>>>>>> to 15
>>>>>> year old opengl32.dll to make it modern opengl
>>>>>> d3 polyfill: web browser technologies > polyfill - program
>>>>>> against an
>>>>>> assumed modern browser, and use polyfill.js to discover current
>>>>>> browser
>>>>>> capaiblities and fill in any gaps by emulating
>>>>>> d4 unrolling: mangled-name copies pasted into same scope - 
>>>>>> don't
>>>>>> know
>>>>>> what domain its from, but what John is doing when
>>>>>> proto-expanding, its
>>>>>> like what freewrl did for 10 years for protos
>>>>>> d5 adware / iframe / webcomponents > separate scopes
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2015/07/14/bringing-componentization-to-the-web-an-overview-of-web-components/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> http://www.benfarrell.com/2015/10/26/es6-web-components-part-1-a-man-without-a-framework/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - React, dojo, polymer, angular, es6, webcomponents.js 
>>>>>> polyfill,
>>>>>> shadoow
>>>>>> dom,import, same-origin iframe
>>>>>>
>>>>>> d6 server > when a client wants something, and says what its
>>>>>> capabilities are, then serve them what they are capable of
>>>>>> displaying
>>>>>> d7 viral videos
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (its hard to do a table in turtle graphics, so I'll do e/d 
>>>>>> lists)
>>>>>> e1 / d1 compiler: have one high level format which is 
>>>>>> technology
>>>>>> agnostic, with LTS long term stablility, and compile/translate 
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> all
>>>>>> other formats which are more technology dependent. Need to
>>>>>> show/prove
>>>>>> the high level can be transformed/ is transformable to all
>>>>>> desired
>>>>>> targets like html Dom variants, html Inline variants, and 
>>>>>> desktop
>>>>>> variants
>>>>>> e4 / d1 including compiling to inline or dom variants
>>>>>> e1 / d6 server-time transformation or selection: gets client
>>>>>> capabilities in request, and either
>>>>>> - a) transforms a generic format to target capabilities variant
>>>>>> or
>>>>>> - b) selects from among prepared variants to match target
>>>>>> capaibilties,
>>>>>> e5 / d1 compiler: can compile static geometry from high level
>>>>>> nurbs/extrusions to indexedfaceset depending on target
>>>>>> capabilities,
>>>>>> need to have a STATIC keyword in case extrusion is animated?
>>>>>> e6 / d1 compiler transforms routes, timers, events to target
>>>>>> platform
>>>>>> equivalents
>>>>>>
>>>>>> e5 / d2 extension wrangling > depending on capaiblities of
>>>>>> target,
>>>>>> during transform stage, substitute Protos for high level nodes,
>>>>>> when
>>>>>> target browser can't support the component/level directly
>>>>>> e5 / d3 polyfill > when a target doesn't support some feature,
>>>>>> polyfill
>>>>>> so it runs enough to support a stable format
>>>>>>
>>>>>> e8 / d7 create viral video of web3d consortium
>>>>>> deciding/trying-to-decide
>>>>>> something. Maybe creative strategy step 3: decide among matrix
>>>>>> elements
>>>>>> at a session at siggraph with audience watching or 
>>>>>> participating
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> special "help us decide" siggraph session.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> e2 / d5 webcomponents and proto scripts: create scripts with/in
>>>>>> different webcomponent scope;
>>>>>> e3 / d5 webcomponents make Scene and ProtoInstance both in a
>>>>>> webcomponent, with hierarchy of webcomponents for nested
>>>>>> protoInstances.
>>>>>> e2+e3 / d4 unrolling + protos > unroll protos and scripts a)
>>>>>> upstream/on
>>>>>> server or transformer b) in client on demand
>>>>>>
>>>>>> e7 / d6 server simplifies featuers ie SAI or not based on 
>>>>>> client
>>>>>> capabilities
>>>>>> e7 / d1 compiler compiles out features not supported by target
>>>>>> client
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ____d1___d2___d3___d4___d5___d6___d7
>>>>>> e1 __ * _______________________ *
>>>>>> e2 _________________ *___*
>>>>>> e3 _________________ *___*
>>>>>> e4 _*
>>>>>> e5 _*_____*____*
>>>>>> e6 _*
>>>>>> e7 _*_________________________*
>>>>>> e8 ________________________________*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or something like that,
>>>>>> But would Step 3 creatively recombine element solutions into
>>>>>> total
>>>>>> solution still result in deadlock? Or can that deadlock be one 
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> problem elements, and domain solutions applied? For example 
>>>>>> does
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> compiler/transformer workflow idea automatically solve current
>>>>>> deadlock,
>>>>>> or does deadlock need more specific attention ie breakdown into
>>>>>> elements
>>>>>> of deadlock, searching domains for solutions to deadlock 
>>>>>> elements
>>>>>> etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HTH
>>>>>> -Doug
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> x3d-public mailing list
>>>>>> x3d-public at web3d.org
>>>>>> http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> x3d-public mailing list
>>>>>> x3d-public at web3d.org
>>>>>> http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>>>
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> Deutsches Forschungszentrum für Künstliche Intelligenz (DFKI) 
>>>>> GmbH
>>>>> Trippstadter Strasse 122, D-67663 Kaiserslautern
>>>>>
>>>>> Geschäftsführung:
>>>>>  Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Wolfgang Wahlster (Vorsitzender)
>>>>>  Dr. Walter Olthoff
>>>>> Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats:
>>>>>  Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes
>>>>>
>>>>> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Kaiserslautern (HRB 2313)
>>>>> VAT/USt-Id.Nr.: DE 148 646 973, Steuernummer:  19/673/0060/3
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>>
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Deutsches Forschungszentrum für Künstliche Intelligenz (DFKI) GmbH
>>> Trippstadter Strasse 122, D-67663 Kaiserslautern
>>>
>>> Geschäftsführung:
>>>  Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Wolfgang Wahlster (Vorsitzender)
>>>  Dr. Walter Olthoff
>>> Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats:
>>>  Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes
>>>
>>> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Kaiserslautern (HRB 2313)
>>> VAT/USt-Id.Nr.: DE 148 646 973, Steuernummer:  19/673/0060/3
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> x3d-public mailing list
>> x3d-public at web3d.org
>> http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org
>>
>
> -- 
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Deutsches Forschungszentrum für Künstliche Intelligenz (DFKI) GmbH
> Trippstadter Strasse 122, D-67663 Kaiserslautern
>
> Geschäftsführung:
>  Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Wolfgang Wahlster (Vorsitzender)
>  Dr. Walter Olthoff
> Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats:
>  Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes
>
> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Kaiserslautern (HRB 2313)
> VAT/USt-Id.Nr.: DE 148 646 973, Steuernummer:  19/673/0060/3
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>