<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;"><!-- P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} --></style>
</head>
<body dir="ltr">
<div id="divtagdefaultwrapper" style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;background-color:#FFFFFF;font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">
<p>Yes, you can IS to script fields and protoinstance fields in v3.3</p>
<p>-Doug</p>
<p>more..</p>
<p>Dynamic fields -per-instance like Script, or per type like ProtoInstance- are abstracted to look like normal fields during runtime. That means you can/should-be-able-to IS to them (and ROUTE to them) like they are normal fields. That includes builtin, Script
and ProtoInstance fields. Except we know the names and types of builtin fields a priori, and for dynamic fields we need to describe their types in the scene file. So ideally they are orthogonal / separate issues: declaring dynamic fields, and ISing / ROUTEing to
any field dynamic or builtin.</p>
<p>more..</p>
<p>Gotchas: </p>
<p>- early vrml implementations didn't allow static fields ie Field or InputOutput, just events EventIn and EventOut. I think they are allowed in v3.3, or seem to work.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
<br>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<hr tabindex="-1" style="display:inline-block; width:98%">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" color="#000000" style="font-size:11pt"><b>From:</b> x3d-public <x3d-public-bounces@web3d.org> on behalf of John Carlson <yottzumm@gmail.com><br>
<b>Sent:</b> June 30, 2016 9:40 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> X3D Graphics public mailing list<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [x3d-public] Understanding of IS connect for xml...issue for JSON encoding.</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div>
<p dir="ltr">My understanding of IS connect is as follows. For Script nodes, the nodeField refers to a field "name" attribute value. For regular nodes, the nodeField is an attribute name. Any other gotchas? Does ProtoInstance take an IS node?</p>
<p dir="ltr">If the distinction between field and attribute is not there in VRML (is it?), why do we have it in the JSON encoding? Does it lead to better validation of files?</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>