[x3d-public] Essential Characteristics of X3D
highaspirations at hotmail.com
Sat Nov 19 09:07:07 PST 2016
OK Yves, starting to sink in. Thanks for repeating your Oct 13 suggestion.
What you're saying is for $138 swiss francs, and a bit of paper work, CalergaVR could conform to web3d standards by defining and registering its profile.
Q. is there a subtle difference between a standard, and an specific 'application interface' (is there a better term)?
- lets say a 'standard' means anyone can implement the standard. So if you register the CalergaVR profile, I could write a browser that conforms to the CalergaVR profile and you would have no recourse in the courts to block my effort as stealing proprietary intellectual property
- an 'application interface' can be proprietary. You can block me insofar as it's not part of a standard
And if there is this difference then I suspect the profile registration process in the web3d specs is for the 'standard'.
Q. are you proposing these x- or x/ profiles would be standards, or proprietary, or could/should there be both?
From: Yves Piguet <yves.piguet at gmail.com>
Sent: November 19, 2016 8:15 AM
To: doug sanden
Cc: X3D Public
Subject: Re: [x3d-public] Essential Characteristics of X3D
Fine. By applying this strictly, per 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 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>.
On 19 Nov 2016, at 14:54, doug sanden <highaspirations at hotmail.com<mailto: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.
More information about the x3d-public