<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple style='overflow-wrap:break-word;
word-break:break-word'>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>I was hoping you could provide code snippets showing an example
of this implementation, as going through and dissecting your entire project to
find it myself is a little out of reach time wise.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Buffering, as in consolidating events from the various NSs into
a minimum number of connections, as opposed to initiating a connection every
time an event calls for it. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>I talked about the two sides of a coin, but you may or may not
have visibility to another aspect of what a NetworkSensorNode is; namely the
browser side or, the client side of the client-server relationship. The NetworkSensorNode
is the interface between the scene and the network, and if we only looked at scene
authoring, then we'd be completely missing out on the network side, which is
really what's important here.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Specific implementations may have different goals and
objectives, but I am not too concerned with that. I'd like us to focus on the
network connection interface directly, in a way that it can be generalized and
applicable to a wide range of applications. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>GL <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> x3d-public
[mailto:x3d-public-bounces@web3d.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Christoph Valentin<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, April 21, 2019 2:46 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> x3d-public@web3d.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [x3d-public] Fw: Question about MU and Network Sensor<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>>>>>> However, once you do buffer events in
order to manage connections, then the perceived benefit of placing
NetworkSensors inside models may become moot, though perhaps under specific
scenarios an author may elect to use that approach. Have you tried such an
implementation?<br>
<br>
<br>
I did not understand the issue with the buffering ?????? Is it about the HNSI?<br>
-- <br>
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android Mobiltelefon mit GMX Mail gesendet.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Am 21.04.19, 19:59, Christoph Valentin
<christoph.valentin@gmx.at> schrieb:<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>>>>
Have you tried such an implementation?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>Yes<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'><a
href="http://simulrr.sourceforge.net">http://simulrr.sourceforge.net</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>>>>
I do not really see how it simplifies authoring, as models portability would
also be impeded.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>If
it's agreed as an ISO standard, the portability would even be increased,
avoiding museum like 3D models<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>>>>Perhaps
a specific example would help.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'><a
href="http://simulrr.sourceforge.net">http://simulrr.sourceforge.net</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div style='border:none;border-left:solid #C3D9E5 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;
margin-left:6.0pt;margin-top:6.0pt;margin-right:3.0pt;margin-bottom:3.0pt;
word-wrap: break-word;-webkit-nbsp-mode: space;-webkit-line-break: after-white-space'
name=quote>
<div style='margin-bottom:6.0pt'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'>Gesendet:</span></b><span
style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'> Sonntag, 21.
April 2019 um 19:13 Uhr<br>
<b>Von:</b> "GL" <info@3dnetproductions.com><br>
<b>An:</b> "'x3d-publicweb3d.org'"
<x3d-public@web3d.org><br>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re: [x3d-public] Fw: Question about MU and Network Sensor<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div name=quoted-content>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"'><br>
Absolutely. In its most basic form: X3DNetworkSensorNode = Connection +
NetworkSensor(s)<br>
<br>
You are essentially asking if it is ok to separate the two sides of a coin,<br>
and "bury/hide" one side into models. I get that. The problem becomes
one of connection instantiation. Unless you have in place a mechanism for
buffering events, the NetworkSensors will keep on instantiating connections.
However, once you do buffer events in order to manage connections, then the
perceived benefit of placing NetworkSensors inside models may become moot,
though perhaps under specific scenarios an author may elect to use that
approach. Have you tried such an implementation? I do not really see how it
simplifies authoring, as models portability would also be impeded. Perhaps a
specific example would help.<br>
<br>
GL<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
From: x3d-public [mailto:x3d-public-bounces@web3d.org] On Behalf Of Christoph
Valentin<br>
Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2019 6:08 AM<br>
To: x3d-publicweb3d.org<br>
Subject: [x3d-public] Fw: Question about MU and Network Sensor<br>
<br>
I have not yet answered the part of the example about entering the car and
driving away........<br>
<br>
Let's first discuss the basics, OK? :-)<br>
<br>
Gesendet: Sonntag, 21. April 2019 um 11:47 Uhr<br>
Von: "Christoph Valentin" <christoph.valentin@gmx.at><br>
An: "x3d-publicweb3d.org" <x3d-public@web3d.org><br>
Betreff: Re: [x3d-public] Question about MU and Network Sensor<br>
Gina-Lauren, All<br>
<br>
To stick to your example: No, I am not suggesting that. You are bringing two
things together that are not related to each other.<br>
<br>
1. Having Network Sensors "buried" within models<br>
2. Each Network Sensor using their own network connection<br>
<br>
These two things are not related with each other. If you had had a look to my
drawing, you would have seen the network connection is maintained by the
"Network Sensor Infrastructure" and all "Network Sensor"s
use the same connection, using the "Hidden Network Sensor Interface"
(HNSI).<br>
<br>
Getting back to the example:<br>
<br>
The hat of the avatar and the bag he is carrying are two examples of models
that don't need any synchronization. Given the hat and the bag are
rigid bodies, they are just rendered relative to the hand of the avatar and
relative to the head of the avatar.<br>
<br>
The avatar has to care for the synchronization of the position of his hand and
of his head (and therefore of the bag and of the hat).<br>
<br>
The car and its doors, the steering and the drive, are a perfect example for
what I mean, on the other hand. In my humble opinion, the model of the car
should already contain all environment sensors (e.g. a touch sensor for each
door) and all network sensors for the synchronization of the car (of its doors,
steering and drive).<br>
<br>
The surrounding scene should as little as possible be affected by the following
facts<br>
• it is a car, that is attached to the scene<br>
• the car is MU capable<br>
• the specific type of the car (racing car, offroad car, ......)<br>
<br>
So let me rephrase my question to x3d-public:<br>
a) Is it OK to require from each Network Sensor implementation to use a HNSI
for the connection of all Network Sensors to the Network Sensor Infrastructure,
in order to ENABLE burying of network sensors within models?<br>
b) Is it OK, to ALLOW model authors to bury their Network Sensors within their
models without bothering scene authors too much?<br>
<br>
One detail: we are using the term "network connection". This term is
poorly specified, but I think we can agree to use it, as long as we define we
are meaning one of the following things:<br>
• TCP connection<br>
• SCTP association<br>
• SIP dialog<br>
• .......and so on<br>
<br>
All the best<br>
Christoph<br>
<br>
Gesendet: Sonntag, 21. April 2019 um 07:25 Uhr<br>
Von: "GL" <info@3dnetproductions.com><br>
An: "'x3d-publicweb3d.org'"
<x3d-public@web3d.org><br>
Betreff: Re: [x3d-public] Question about MU and Network Sensor<br>
Christoph,<br>
<br>
Let's say for example that you have an avatar wearing a hat and
carrying a bag. That avatar opens a car door, gets in and drives away.<br>
<br>
Are you suggesting that the avatar, the hat, the bag, the car door and the car
itself should all have a separate NS within and make each their own connection
to the server? It is feasible, but unless I am missing something from this
reasoning, my take on it would be that the server would get overloaded rather
quickly, resulting from all of the extra connections. So in other words,
instead of being able to handle say 50 avatars per machine, now we'd
have only 10 (in this example), since each model would have to synchronize via
their own connection. Also, network latency could cause the hat to fall behind
or the car door to get ahead of the car and everything.<br>
<br>
Like I've mentioned before, I could see something this working
somewhat better with Java3D (though I haven't touched it in years),
but with X3D it brings up questions to my mind. So to answer your question, IMO
it is better to have fewer connections and pack as much info into them as
possible. But assuming that you'd want to do it anyway, the models
would still work and interact with the scene as specified (however
we're getting into other considerations here that exceed the context
of this post).<br>
<br>
GL<br>
<br>
From: x3d-public [mailto:x3d-public-bounces@web3d.org] On Behalf Of Christoph
Valentin<br>
Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2019 12:26 PM<br>
To: x3d-publicweb3d.org<br>
Subject: [x3d-public] Question about MU and Network Sensor<br>
<br>
Dear all,<br>
<br>
Am trying to figure out one detail about the highly discussed "Network
Sensor".<br>
<br>
Have now explained the "operational paradigm" of the network sensor,
as I think to understand, at our SP-ARK WIKI:<br>
<br>
<a href="https://github.com/christoph-v/spark/wiki/Operational-Paradigm"
target="_blank">https://github.com/christoph-v/spark/wiki/Operational-Paradigm</a><br>
<br>
If you follow that link, you will find I am trying to use my own words in order
to describe the well-known. This is not only due to the fact that I have got a
fatal tendence to invent the wheel another time and another time, it it also
due to Copyright considerations.<br>
<br>
If you follow the link, then you will find my impression the interface of the
Network Sensor is twofold.<br>
<br>
First there is the what-I-call CNSI (Common Network Sensor Interface).<br>
<br>
Second there is the what-I-call SNSI (Specific Network Sensor Interface).<br>
<br>
Now getting to the point: is it acceptable to require the SNSI MUST remain
WITHIN the model? Is it allowed to have it affecting the "master
scene"?<br>
<br>
I think this is an important question, otherwise I wouldn't bother
you.<br>
<br>
All the best<br>
<br>
Christoph<br>
<br>
P.S.: Currently the WIKI has got only two pages, the home page is <a
href="https://github.com/christoph-v/spark/wiki" target="_blank">https://github.com/christoph-v/spark/wiki</a><br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
x3d-public mailing list<br>
x3d-public@web3d.org<br>
<a href="http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org" target="_blank">http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org</a><br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
x3d-public mailing list<br>
x3d-public@web3d.org<br>
<a href="http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org" target="_blank">http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal>_______________________________________________ x3d-public
mailing list x3d-public@web3d.org
http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>