[x3d-public] Essential Characteristics of X3D

Yves Piguet yves.piguet at gmail.com
Sat Nov 19 07:15:29 PST 2016

Fine. By applying this strictly, per http://www.web3d.org/documents/specifications/19775-1/V3.3/Part01/concepts.html#ProfilesOverview <http://www.web3d.org/documents/specifications/19775-1/V3.3/Part01/concepts.html#ProfilesOverview> it's only a matter of registering new profiles, and writing files with the proper header and profile attribute or statement.

Unfortunately per http://www.web3d.org/documents/specifications/19775-1/V3.3/Part01/concepts.html#Componentprofilereg <http://www.web3d.org/documents/specifications/19775-1/V3.3/Part01/concepts.html#Componentprofilereg> the registration process is defined in ISO/IEC 9973, which costs 138 swiss francs for the standard itself. The effective registration costs, in term of work, time and money, is unknown. Hence the suggestion I made on Oct 13 2016 for reserved profile names available to everybody for custom extensions, in particular syntax extensions which cannot be emulated by externprotos or feature set reduction like in X3DOM.

That also explains my reluctance to register as an X3D member, even for free, to not be bound by 60 pages of legal terms I'm not comfortable with <http://www.web3d.org/about/documents/legal <http://www.web3d.org/about/documents/legal>>.


> On 19 Nov 2016, at 14:54, doug sanden <highaspirations at hotmail.com> wrote:
> If it conforms to a formal x3d specification by the web3d consortium and the specification was developed through web3d formal processes, and registered as an iso standard, then its x3d.
> Otherwise its not.
> -Doug

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/attachments/20161119/34a5d6ee/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the x3d-public mailing list