[x3d-public] x3dom prototypes, extern proto
John Carlson
yottzumm at gmail.com
Mon Jun 29 12:01:49 PDT 2020
I am fairly sure:
<component name='Networking' level='2'/>
Is required for t1.x3d.
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 1:42 PM John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com> wrote:
> Here's a link that shows essentially the same results between X_ITE and
> X3DOM. The spheres are much smaller now?
>
> https://coderextreme.net/X3DJSONLD/src/main/html/proto2.html
>
> Thanks for double checking!
>
> Go ahead and close the x3dom issue 1044 issue once you check in your
> changes. I will probably refork my repo, since I overwrote my master.
>
> John
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 12:10 PM John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Here's the issue I was unable to solve in 36 hours of debugging, still
>> related to protos.
>>
>> https://github.com/x3dom/x3dom/issues/1044
>>
>> I should be able to provide a data file, t1.x3d, if necessary.
>>
>> John
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 11:11 AM John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> How does one handle scripts inside a ProtoBody (multiple instances of
>>> the same script) is what next on our (or just my) plate.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 11:04 AM Andreas Plesch <andreasplesch at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Nothing is done to script elements. So the ones with a vrmlscript ( or
>>>> any non html standard ) mime type are ignored, and regular script
>>>> elements executed by the browser as dom scripts.
>>>>
>>>> -Andreas
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 11:57 AM John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Yeah! Andreas! Once you clean up, I will attempt to add some kind
>>>> of internal scripting to X3DOM. I’m curious though, what do you currently
>>>> do with Protos with Scripts? Where does the script go?
>>>> >
>>>> > John
>>>> >
>>>> > On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 10:31 AM Andreas Plesch <
>>>> andreasplesch at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> After too many hours in the debugger, I added not too many lines to
>>>> >> better deal with changes to node value fields, in particular on how
>>>> to
>>>> >> properly transfer these from the proto instance node to the
>>>> underlying
>>>> >> native (or other proto) node.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> rubikFurnace.x3d should work now, in parallel with the logo letter
>>>> >> example which was the main challenge.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> https://andreasplesch.github.io/x3dom/test/functional/proto/inline.html
>>>> >> https://5efa06157960e80256fa5d6b--x3dom.netlify.app/
>>>> >>
>>>> https://5efa06157960e80256fa5d6b--x3dom.netlify.app/examples/functional/proto/inline.html
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I believe this concludes my substantive efforts. I will now focus on
>>>> >> separating out the proto code to a new file and some clean up.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Andreas
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 6:40 PM John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > I got some more time to work on this, and the new X3DOM proto code
>>>> does just as well with JSON as it does for XML. Congratulations!
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > I think if Andreas fixes the outstanding rubik*'s errors
>>>> (hopefully this will stop the BoxEm errors), and the t1.json/t1.x3d error
>>>> in the x3dom issues, I believe we can declare this successful, and we can
>>>> move onto "scripts"--whatever we're going to call the new script node, if
>>>> not Script. If someone has a document on how X3DOM routes work (especially
>>>> with namescopes), that will help me help with scripts.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > I'm not checking in my X3DJSONLD proto expander disabling code for
>>>> now. For now, my copy will remain disabled for testing.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > There are errors to the X3DJSONLD console if someone wants me to
>>>> copy and paste.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > If you want me to check in code for this into
>>>> x3dom/andreasplesch's gh-pages branch, let me know. I only made change to
>>>> the PrototypeExpander.js code, which effectively disabled the JSON proto
>>>> expander, see below patch (patch to package.json unnecessary).
>>>> >> > diff --git a/package.json b/package.json
>>>> >> > index e1e0d501..7043f4f5 100644
>>>> >> > --- a/package.json
>>>> >> > +++ b/package.json
>>>> >> > @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
>>>> >> > },
>>>> >> > "scripts": {
>>>> >> > "test": "echo \"Error: no test specified\" && exit 1",
>>>> >> > - "build": "node ./build/src-builder.js",
>>>> >> > + "build": "node --trace-warnings ./build/src-builder.js",
>>>> >> > "lint": "eslint \"src/**/*.js\"",
>>>> >> > "lint-fix": "eslint --fix \"src/**/*.js\""
>>>> >> > },
>>>> >> > diff --git a/src/util/json/PrototypeExpander.js
>>>> b/src/util/json/PrototypeExpander.js
>>>> >> > index 9bf64e6a..fc1e87e0 100644
>>>> >> > --- a/src/util/json/PrototypeExpander.js
>>>> >> > +++ b/src/util/json/PrototypeExpander.js
>>>> >> > @@ -740,6 +740,8 @@ x3dom.PROTOS.prototype = {
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > prototypeExpander : function ( file, object )
>>>> >> > {
>>>> >> > + // Use Andreas' proto code
>>>> >> > + /*
>>>> >> > this.protos = {};
>>>> >> > this.names = {};
>>>> >> > this.protoField = {};
>>>> >> > @@ -756,6 +758,7 @@ x3dom.PROTOS.prototype = {
>>>> >> > object = this.flattener( object );
>>>> >> > // console.error("SCRIPTS",
>>>> JSON.stringify(this.scriptField));
>>>> >> > // console.error("PROTOS",
>>>> JSON.stringify(this.protoField, null, 2));
>>>> >> > + */
>>>> >> > return object;
>>>> >> > },
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 2:38 PM John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> I'm showing X_ITE sort of working, select rubikFurnace.json on
>>>> the below linked page. Perhaps it's the conversion to/from JSON that makes
>>>> it work? Or perhaps the JSON proto expander? Turning off the proto expander
>>>> shows spheres for X_ITE/JSON, but green cubes for X_ITE XML/DOM. It
>>>> appears that X_ITE/JSON/Protos/rubikFurnace needs some work which
>>>> X3DJSONLD/proto expander magically fixes. I usually run with proto
>>>> expansion enabled, so I wouldn't normally catch this error! Thanks for
>>>> the bug report!
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> https://coderextreme.net/X3DJSONLD/src/main/html/index.html
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> This uses your netlify version of x3dom.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> Pasting XML into the above page with proto expansion on, only the
>>>> X3DOM/XML/DOM version fails. Other versions show green cubes. Without the
>>>> proto expansion, the previous example mentioned fails, but the JSON X_ITE
>>>> version fails with white cubes. Loading XML with a local server shows no
>>>> differences. I guess I could check the console next. Looks okay.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> After working on t1.json for a while (see your x3dom issue
>>>> related to proto expander), I noticed that my changes broke some of the
>>>> rubik*'s examples. I was not successful at making both t1.json and
>>>> rubik.json working. I don't know if that helps or not. Making the .x3d
>>>> versions of these examples work may be tricky.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> I am following your lead on renaming "sphere" to "sphereproto" in
>>>> rubik.x3d
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> I will start testing with your netlify version:
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> Here is my proto check page with netlify (all examples seem to
>>>> work, json proto expander on):
>>>> http://coderextreme.net/X3DJSONLD/src/main/html/x3domproto.html for
>>>> JSON.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> Here's the equivalent for XML Inlines (please try to get this
>>>> page or similar working like the previous!) with netlify.
>>>> https://coderextreme.net/X3DJSONLD/src/main/html/xmlproto.html
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> The two files should be checked into github for your editing
>>>> convenience.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> The xmlproto.html is much better with a locally built x3dom
>>>> (gh-pages branch) than the remote netlify version. You might want to
>>>> update the netlify version?
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> Note the presence of a Script in the flowerproto. I'm not
>>>> expecting that to work yet. It might be fun to get it working, though,
>>>> which I have kind of done:
>>>> >> >> https://coderextreme.net/X3DJSONLD/src/main/html/proto.html
>>>> (select ../data/x3domflowers.x3d).
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> If you've got a script instance per flower from your proto
>>>> implementation, it might be possible. One just needs to rename
>>>> "scripts"/implement the routes to and from "scripts" (whatever you want to
>>>> call them), I am pretty sure. This becomes more and more doable, I am
>>>> thinking now, thanks to your effort with Protos.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> Don, can you add a check to the X3dToJson.xslt to throw a warning
>>>> if a proto declare name is the same as a tag?
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> Thanks,
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> John
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 12:28 AM Andreas Plesch <
>>>> andreasplesch at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>> Thanks, very helpful. Two issues came up. Since 'sphere' is a
>>>> name of
>>>> >> >>> a regular node, but then was registered as a new proto node,
>>>> things
>>>> >> >>> broke. Not sure what to do about it, maybe just documenting.
>>>> HTML has
>>>> >> >>> a requirement for names of custom nodes to avoid such conflicts.
>>>> I
>>>> >> >>> renamed the proto to protosphere which fixed the scene.
>>>> rubikOnFire
>>>> >> >>> was interesting because it is the only example which has an IS
>>>> >> >>> connection to a node field of a ProtoInstance. I found a
>>>> workaround
>>>> >> >>> which should work most of the time. rubikFurnace does not work,
>>>> it
>>>> >> >>> shows just the default spheres, not sure. x-ite has the same
>>>> problem
>>>> >> >>> with it, so maybe there is a deeper issue although I think the
>>>> x3d
>>>> >> >>> looks ok.
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> https://andreasplesch.github.io/x3dom/test/functional/proto/inline.html
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>> PS: I started to use a chromebook and I think x-ite and x3dom
>>>> are the
>>>> >> >>> only x3d browsers for this platform. I looks like freeWrl for
>>>> android
>>>> >> >>> would need to be updated to work on it. I am getting used to the
>>>> >> >>> touchscreen,
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>> On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 9:38 PM John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >> >>> >
>>>> >> >>> > Here is an example to try:
>>>> >> >>> >
>>>> https://github.com/coderextreme/X3DJSONLD/blob/master/src/main/data/rubik.x3d
>>>> >> >>> >
>>>> >> >>> > Other rubik*.x3d examples in same folder may be useful too,
>>>> but I can no longer remember all the differences. I know all shapes
>>>> should be the same in the result, cylinder results are not correct and
>>>> there are 27 shapes in the result.
>>>> >> >>> >
>>>> >> >>> > The result of the one in the email should be 27 spheres.
>>>> >> >>> >
>>>> >> >>> > John
>>>> >> >>> >
>>>> >> >>> > On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 6:23 PM Andreas Plesch <
>>>> andreasplesch at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >> >>> >>
>>>> >> >>> >> I also start to think the main reason for the ExternProto
>>>> fields is to
>>>> >> >>> >> enable easier and more performant loading by browsers, using a
>>>> >> >>> >> template and fill in the details later approach.
>>>> >> >>> >>
>>>> >> >>> >> I expanded my working example list to a satisfactory number
>>>> for x3dom
>>>> >> >>> >> and will start to clean up and refactor a bit. Almost each
>>>> example
>>>> >> >>> >> needed additional attention to the processing so no doubt
>>>> there are
>>>> >> >>> >> gaps in coverage which soon will be discovered by actual
>>>> usage. But as
>>>> >> >>> >> long as the complexity in terms of nesting and async. loading
>>>> does not
>>>> >> >>> >> exceed the examples, the behaviour should be fairly robust.
>>>> The #name
>>>> >> >>> >> syntax works. The helicopter (Example16) is fairly complex
>>>> and works
>>>> >> >>> >> now, after replacing the script with event utilities. The
>>>> LogoLetter
>>>> >> >>> >> example unearthed another interesting bug which triggered
>>>> exponential
>>>> >> >>> >> doubling of shapes. Some castle engine examples stress the
>>>> limits,
>>>> >> >>> >> mostly by redefining DEFs (usually a no go) but do something
>>>> >> >>> >> reasonable now.
>>>> >> >>> >>
>>>> >> >>> >> The approach taken is to register actual new node types (which
>>>> >> >>> >> internally use other nodes) and then use more or less the
>>>> regular node
>>>> >> >>> >> creation and instancing for the ProtoInstances, after
>>>> converting them
>>>> >> >>> >> to a more readable syntax. I think this works as well as
>>>> expanding
>>>> >> >>> >> templates and feels more natural but tends to uncover implicit
>>>> >> >>> >> assumptions in the code. For example, x3dom assumes that
>>>> Material as a
>>>> >> >>> >> X3DAppearanceChild node is always a child of an Appearance
>>>> node. With
>>>> >> >>> >> protos, it can be a child of another node as well. So I had to
>>>> >> >>> >> eventually start to use a try/catch clause.
>>>> >> >>> >>
>>>> >> >>> >> Thanks for maintaining the example, they are critical to get
>>>> uniform behaviours.
>>>> >> >>> >>
>>>> >> >>> >> Here are the updated working examples:
>>>> >> >>> >>
>>>> >> >>> >>
>>>> https://andreasplesch.github.io/x3dom/test/functional/proto/inline.html
>>>> >> >>> >>
>>>> >> >>> >> I may be interested in trying a few more examples without
>>>> script nodes
>>>> >> >>> >> but I think these are a good selection.
>>>> >> >>> >>
>>>> >> >>> >> Any feedback welcome,
>>>> >> >>> >>
>>>> >> >>> >> -Andreas
>>>> >> >>> >>
>>>> >> >>> >> On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 2:09 PM Don Brutzman <
>>>> brutzman at nps.edu> wrote:
>>>> >> >>> >> >
>>>> >> >>> >> > On 6/26/2020 10:50 AM, Andreas Plesch wrote:
>>>> >> >>> >> > >
>>>> >> >>> >> > > Thanks for thinking this through. I am not seeing any
>>>> inconsistencies,
>>>> >> >>> >> > > only redundancies which could invite authoring errors in
>>>> the first
>>>> >> >>> >> > > place.
>>>> >> >>> >> > >
>>>> >> >>> >> > > I think for now, x3dom will have to go by the garbage in,
>>>> garbage out
>>>> >> >>> >> > > principle, meaning that inconsistent field statements may
>>>> cause
>>>> >> >>> >> > > problems. The spec. actually requires consistent naming.
>>>> >> >>> >> >
>>>> >> >>> >> > agreed
>>>> >> >>> >> >
>>>> >> >>> >> > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 10:06 AM Don Brutzman <
>>>> brutzman at nps.edu> wrote:
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>
>>>> >> >>> >> > >> Checking ProtoDeclare and ExternProtoDeclare can be
>>>> tricky, but I think it is correctly defined.
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>
>>>> >> >>> >> > >> My understanding of the intent of that section was to
>>>> prevent unexpected errors in the case of
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>
>>>> >> >>> >> > >> a. ProtoDeclare defined,
>>>> >> >>> >> > >> b. ExternProtoDeclare and ProtoInstance example work and
>>>> are deployed,
>>>> >> >>> >> > >> c. ProtoDeclare subsequently adds some additional fields
>>>> or changes default field values,
>>>> >> >>> >> > >
>>>> >> >>> >> > > How would that happen ? Externally, by editing the
>>>> ProtoDeclare in the
>>>> >> >>> >> > > referenced file ? That would seem like a situation which
>>>> should not be
>>>> >> >>> >> > > in the scope of x3d.
>>>> >> >>> >> >
>>>> >> >>> >> > correct. have seen this occur with long-term re-use of
>>>> valuable prototypes that continue to evolve, it is important to find
>>>> external instances or modify/evolve them with backwards compatibility in
>>>> mind.
>>>> >> >>> >> >
>>>> >> >>> >> > >> d. ExternProtoDeclare and ProtoInstance example still
>>>> work OK though new ProtoDeclare is retrieved at runtime.
>>>> >> >>> >> > >
>>>> >> >>> >> > > Hm, is there a requirement to reload already loaded
>>>> ProtoDeclare's
>>>> >> >>> >> > > when a new ProtoInstance is added to a scene ?
>>>> >> >>> >> >
>>>> >> >>> >> > no, that would be dangerous/unexpected. no hidden
>>>> dependencies here, just stepping through typical use.
>>>> >> >>> >> >
>>>> >> >>> >> > >> Certainly the browser loading the original/updated
>>>> ProtoDeclare must honor the behavior defined therein, including default
>>>> values.
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>
>>>> >> >>> >> > >> If the field interfaces within the ExternProtoDeclare
>>>> (which only contain name, type, accessType and not default values) are
>>>> different, that would be an error.
>>>> >> >>> >> > >
>>>> >> >>> >> > > yes, exactly, so why have those field interfaces ?
>>>> >> >>> >> >
>>>> >> >>> >> > Having ExternProtoDeclare allows a browser to load and set
>>>> up all connections with type information in mind, allowing remote loading
>>>> of ProtoDeclare to occur in parallel. Thus performance speedup.
>>>> >> >>> >> >
>>>> >> >>> >> > >> As above, if default values within the ProtoDeclare
>>>> change, this has no impact on ExternProtoDeclare field definitions because
>>>> they do not list default values.
>>>> >> >>> >> > >
>>>> >> >>> >> > > I am not sure how the default values could change.
>>>> >> >>> >> >
>>>> >> >>> >> > long-term evolution of a published prototype in a library,
>>>> for example.
>>>> >> >>> >> >
>>>> >> >>> >> > >> When a ProtoInstance provides fieldValue
>>>> initializations, they of course supersede whatever the default might be in
>>>> the ProtoDeclare.
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>
>>>> >> >>> >> > >> ... so I think this all hangs together cleanly without
>>>> contradiction or ambiguity.
>>>> >> >>> >> > >
>>>> >> >>> >> > > Agreed, just potentially confusing redundancy.
>>>> >> >>> >> >
>>>> >> >>> >> > it takes some practice to get familiar since the
>>>> capabilities are powerful.
>>>> >> >>> >> >
>>>> >> >>> >> > >> Implementation-support notes:
>>>> >> >>> >> > >> - InstantReality handles cases well, although console
>>>> warnings sometimes include false positives.
>>>> >> >>> >> > >
>>>> >> >>> >> > > I am using view3dscene and freeWrl for testing. Most
>>>> examples work
>>>> >> >>> >> > > well though freeWrl seems to have a problem with the
>>>> nested spin group
>>>> >> >>> >> > > prototype example.
>>>> >> >>> >> >
>>>> >> >>> >> > As an author I avoid nested prototypes, they seem less
>>>> robust and more likely to fail.
>>>> >> >>> >> >
>>>> >> >>> >> > >> - X3D-Edit has a feature to check ExternProtoDeclare
>>>> interfaces against ProtoDeclare interfaces.
>>>> >> >>> >> > >> - Utility methods for such checking would be a good
>>>> feature to add to our Java, Python and JavaScript libraries.
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>
>>>> >> >>> >> > >> Loading and checking for such consistency is typically
>>>> not performed by any of our Quality Assurance (QA) tools since they tend to
>>>> perform validations in an offline manner. For X3DOM, I think this gap in
>>>> testing coverage means that you should carefully check for consistency
>>>> because if ProtoDeclare and ExternProtoDeclare differ then an incompatible
>>>> interface is expected and model errors are likely.
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>
>>>> >> >>> >> > >> Improvements always welcome. Thanks for close scrutiny
>>>> and thanks for tackling this super valuable capability for X3DOM.
>>>> >> >>> >> > >
>>>> >> >>> >> > > You can follow progress here:
>>>> >> >>> >> > >
>>>> >> >>> >> > >
>>>> https://andreasplesch.github.io/x3dom/test/functional/proto/inline.html#Front
>>>> >> >>> >> >
>>>> >> >>> >> > impressive setup
>>>> >> >>> >> >
>>>> >> >>> >> > > It will be interesting to see how Protos can be used in
>>>> combination
>>>> >> >>> >> > > with web js based templating.
>>>> >> >>> >> > >
>>>> >> >>> >> > > -Andreas
>>>> >> >>> >> >
>>>> >> >>> >> > thanks for taking the time to get this part right now.
>>>> that will make future HTML5-X3D4 patterns a lot more stable and
>>>> understandable.
>>>> >> >>> >> >
>>>> >> >>> >> > >> On 6/23/2020 6:10 PM, Andreas Plesch wrote:
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>> ...
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>>> The next step would be to support the
>>>> ExternProtoDeclare statement.
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>>> The main question I have is about the function of the
>>>> additional field
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>>> statements under ExternProtoDeclare.
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>>>
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>>> - Do they replace ProtoInterface field statements ?
>>>> (No.)
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>>> - Is the ProtoInterface element still required in the
>>>> external file ? (Yes.)
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>>> - Are they listed just for convenience (for the author
>>>> and the browser) ? (Yes?)
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>>> - Can they be ignored ? (Yes?)
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>>
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>> I did find the clause "The names and types of the
>>>> fields of the
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>> interface declaration shall be a subset of those
>>>> defined in the
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>> implementation." in 4.4.5.2 EXTERNPROTO interface
>>>> semantics. This
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>> means that an ExternProto can restrict access to fields
>>>> by not listing
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>> them in its field elements. So they should not be
>>>> ignored. On the
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>> other hand a browser which ignores them would still
>>>> generate the same
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>> behaviour, minus warnings or errors in an
>>>> ill-constructed scene when a
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>> ProtoInstance is trying to set non-accessible fields.
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>>
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>> So I think as a first cut, it is ok to just load the
>>>> external
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>> Protodeclaration and give it the name of the
>>>> ExternProto and not doing
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>> much or anything with the field elements.
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>>
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>>> Thanks for any insight,
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>>>
>>>> >> >>> >> > >>>> -Andreas
>>>> >> >>> >> >
>>>> >> >>> >> >
>>>> >> >>> >> > 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/brutzman
>>>> >> >>> >>
>>>> >> >>> >>
>>>> >> >>> >>
>>>> >> >>> >> --
>>>> >> >>> >> Andreas Plesch
>>>> >> >>> >> Waltham, MA 02453
>>>> >> >>> >>
>>>> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>> >> >>> >> x3d-public mailing list
>>>> >> >>> >> x3d-public at web3d.org
>>>> >> >>> >> http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>>
>>>> >> >>> --
>>>> >> >>> Andreas Plesch
>>>> >> >>> Waltham, MA 02453
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> --
>>>> >> Andreas Plesch
>>>> >> Waltham, MA 02453
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Andreas Plesch
>>>> Waltham, MA 02453
>>>>
>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/attachments/20200629/9c1d231d/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the x3d-public
mailing list