[x3d-public] Proposed new Profile

[John Carlson]

Trying to figure out if x3d-public or my system is generating spoofed
emails.   Ignore.

On Jan 31, 2018 12:42 PM, "Don Brutzman" <brutzman at nps.edu> wrote:

> Interesting discussions.  Here are some additional profile possibilities
> to improve model interchange.
>
> Since profiles are intended to provide common shared needs, these design
> criteria are all good to consider and compare/contrast together.
>
> ========================================================================
> ========================================================================
>
> 1. Background.  The architecture for X3D profile, component, level is
> defined to support diverse extensibility, with profiles intended to define
> a commonly used palette of capabilities that support common use cases for
> browser implementations and scene authors.  References:
>
> * X3D Abstract Specification, Concepts, 4.5 Components
> http://www.web3d.org/documents/specifications/19775-1/V3.3/
> Part01/concepts.html#Components
> "An X3D component is a set of related functionality consisting of various
> X3D objects and services as described below."
>
> * X3D Abstract Specification, Concepts, 4.6 Profiles
> http://www.web3d.org/documents/specifications/19775-1/V3.3/
> Part01/concepts.html#Profiles
> "A profile is a named collection of functionality and requirements that
> shall be supported in order for an implementation to conform to that
> profile."
> and
> "Each set of requirements is directed at supporting the needs of a
> particular constituency. Not all constituencies may be satisfied by the
> functionality represented by these profiles. Therefore, this part of
> ISO/IEC 19775 allows for defining additional profiles either through
> amendment to this part of this International Standard or by registration."
>
> * X3D for Web Authors, Brutzman and Daly, Chapter 1 Technical Overview
> 2.5.3. Profile statements and 2.5.4. Component statements, pp. 12-15
> http://x3dgraphics.com/examples/X3dForWebAuthors/Chapter01Te
> chnicalOverview/Chapter01Technical_Overview.pdf
>
> ========================================================================
> ========================================================================
>
> 2. As part of X3D version 4, which allows us considerable design leeway,
> we might consider updating the current Interchange and Interactive Profile
> design criteria.  The original criteria are not "wrong" per se, but they
> might well be improved to better match modern capabilities and practices.
>
> What is missing from these motivations?  Copied here:
>
> ========================================================================
> X3D Abstract Specification, Annex B Interchange profile
> http://www.web3d.org/documents/specifications/19775-1/V3.3/
> Part01/interchange.html
>
> B.1 General
>
> This annex defines the X3D components that comprise the Interchange
> profile. This includes not only the nodes that shall be supported but also
> which fields in the supported nodes may be ignored.
>
> This profile is targeted towards:
>
> * Exchange of geometry and animations between authoring systems,
> * Possible implementation in a low-footprint engine requiring no
> interaction (EXAMPLE  an applet or small browser plug-in),
> * Addressing the limitations of software renders not capable of dealing
> with all details of the full X3D lighting model, and
> * Allowing a broader range of implementations by eliminating some
> complexity of a complete X3D implementation.
>
> ========================================================================
> X3D Abstract Specification, Annex C (normative) Interactive profile
> http://www.web3d.org/documents/specifications/19775-1/V3.3/
> Part01/interactive.html
>
> C.1 General
>
> This annex defines the X3D components that comprise the Interactive
> profile. This includes not only the nodes that shall be supported but also
> which fields in the supported nodes may be ignored.
>
> This profile is targeted towards:
>
> * implementing a lightweight playback engine that supports rich graphics
> and interactivity,
> * possible implementation in a low-footprint engine requiring limited
> navigation and environmental sensor control (EXAMPLE  an applet or small
> browser plug-in), and
> * allowing a broader range of implementations by eliminating some
> complexity of a complete X3D implementation.
>
> ========================================================================
> ========================================================================
>
> 3. Also of interest is to consider glTF capabilities, and whether a
> corresponding X3D Profile for glTF 2 might be defined.
>
> [x3d-public] X3D and glTF Features Comparison
> http://www.web3d.org/mailman/private/x3d-public_web3d.org/20
> 17-December/008028.html
>
> glTF X3D Features Comparison (3 NOV 2017)
> http://www.web3d.org/sites/default/files/page/X3D%20Version%
> 204/glTfX3dFeaturesComparison.pdf
>
> Thanks everyone for considering all of these possibilities.  The potential
> for improving profiles is a real opportunity with X3D version 4.
>
> all the best, Don
> --
> Don Brutzman  Naval Postgraduate School, Code USW/Br
> brutzman at nps.edu
> Watkins 270,  MOVES Institute, Monterey CA 93943-5000 USA
> +1.831.656.2149
> X3D graphics, virtual worlds, navy robotics http://faculty.nps.edu/brutzma
> n
>
> _______________________________________________
> x3d-public mailing list
> x3d-public at web3d.org
> http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/attachments/20180209/fd8e46b8/attachment-0001.html>