<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Yves,<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:36CD73D5-80C2-40E6-A36B-E3D003C34857@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I'm totally with Michalis, and regret the reply of Don. Of course, I also understand that patents could be very harmful and must be avoided. However, I'm not sure that a closed membership is the only answer.
Some kinds of public read-only drafts of 3.4 would be helpful to get a better feeling of the future of X3D. I'm still unsure how to get this information by googling this list or with the documents I've found on github. </pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
The X3D WG has decided not to pursue a V3.4 specification, but going
direct to V4.0. The biggest thing in V4.0 is full support for
running in a web browser.<br>
<br>
I have been working on a proposal for V4.0. It is at
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://tools.realism.com/specification/x3d-v40">http://tools.realism.com/specification/x3d-v40</a> This is not a
complete document, but extends the V3.3 document. This is currently
a work in progress so there are areas that are not complete and
insufficiently specified. I am interested in hearing from people who
wish to contribute.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:36CD73D5-80C2-40E6-A36B-E3D003C34857@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">What I think would be very useful is rationales for the decisions behind X3D. The X3D xml-based format, for instance, seems to be by far the preferred official format, relegating VRML classic to some historic artifact. I assume this means that nobody is supposed to write X3D in a text editor. Standard-compliant JSON obviously isn't meant to be written or read by hand, except for debugging.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
There are parts of X3D (e.g., modeling, complex animation) that
probably should never be written by hand -- it's too easy to mess up
and too difficult to maintain. Other parts are good to keep in
human-readable systems. Going into V4.0 the XML version does make
sense because that integrates directly into HTML.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:36CD73D5-80C2-40E6-A36B-E3D003C34857@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
With the buzz around VR headsets promised for 2016 and all related VR developments on the software side, X3D should be in a good position to be an important piece of the puzzle. </pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
I agree. We need contributors.<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:36CD73D5-80C2-40E6-A36B-E3D003C34857@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I'm not sure it will. Here are three ideas I humbly share:
- Make developing with X3D more fun by reducing its verbosity. For example put more emphasis on VRML classic (renaming it?), and simplify some recurring constructs (Shape, Transform, Script or interpolator nodes required even for trivial things such as converting an SFFloat angle to an SFRotation).</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
The focus has been to incorporate X3D directly into HTML. This is a
more XML-like approach. This approach allows (but does not require)
integration with the DOM. Using ClassicVRML into an HTML document
makes it look more like user-content for display, rather than 3D
instructions. I am interested in how you would simplify the
recurring constructs. <br>
<br>
You might wish to take a look at the new proposed node Animate,
which includes interpolators. The description is at
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://tools.realism.com/specification/x3d-v40/changes-additions-x3d-v33/animate">http://tools.realism.com/specification/x3d-v40/changes-additions-x3d-v33/animate</a>.<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:36CD73D5-80C2-40E6-A36B-E3D003C34857@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">- A large, cool application, such as a totally distributed version of Second Life. Simplicity should be one of the goals to create a community quickly. Most of the pieces are already available.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
This has been discussed. At least to the understanding of the people
involved in the discussion, this type of project is far more complex
and difficult than it initially appeared to be. If you have specific
ideas on how this could be done, please post them.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:36CD73D5-80C2-40E6-A36B-E3D003C34857@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">- Adoption on VR headsets as soon as possible when they'll arrive.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Part of that is being handled by the browser builders. They are
developing a standard interface library that simplifies the work of
application developers so that they need to only develop to the API.
Given the resources of this community, I do not think it would be
good to create a Web3D community effort on this project; however, I
would fully support someone wanting to pursue this on their own.<br>
<br>
<br>
Leonard Daly<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:36CD73D5-80C2-40E6-A36B-E3D003C34857@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
Yves
On 23 févr. 2016, at 01:59, Michalis Kamburelis wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">c. We have begun putting the X3D Specification draft documents into github version control for shared editing and detailed member review.
Hi,
This is fantastic news, if this repository is going to be public. I would love to be able to submit pull requests (or at least issues to the public bugtracker) to the X3D specification. It could be an incredible boost to X3D, to be so open.
(I believe it would be much better system than Web3d.org form "spec comments", where in my experience many submitted issues, even trivial corrections of obvious spec errors, have been lost.)
Is there a chance of this possible in the near future?
I cannot google the X3D specifications on GitHub now, so I assume they are private now?
I'm sorry if this was already explained on this list --- I was a little quiet for the last couple of months, busy in coding (around my engine and X3D and Android:)
Best regards,
Michalis
_______________________________________________
x3d-public mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:x3d-public@web3d.org">x3d-public@web3d.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org">http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
On 23 févr. 2016, at 04:37, Don Brutzman wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">The specification drafts in version control will remain accessible to members only.
On occasion, especially prior to a review vote, we present them to the public for comment. The recent posting of the Extrusion revisions was hopefully helpful.
The Web3D Consortium has carefully established a "safe haven" for members to work where everyone has committed to the IPR Agreement. This approach has ensured, since 1998, that the X3D Specification series remains unencumbered by license fees. It also ensures that members can consider patented contributions as long as they are provided to become royalty free, if accepted.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
_______________________________________________
x3d-public mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:x3d-public@web3d.org">x3d-public@web3d.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org">http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<font class="tahoma,arial,helvetica san serif" color="#333366">
<font size="+1"><b>Leonard Daly</b></font><br>
3D Systems & Cloud Consultant<br>
X3D Co-Chair on Sabbatical<br>
LA ACM SIGGRAPH Chair<br>
President, Daly Realism - <i>Creating the Future</i>
</font></div>
</body>
</html>