<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">These messages were all on the public
list and referenced glTF. <br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">I passed on to 3D Formats WG of Khronos
(manages glTF Specification) for comments and provided a summary
and links to the relevant messages from the mailing list and
documents. There were links to 3 messages (the initial message,
the updated PDF, and Michalis' comments.] and the Google Sheet
document. I gave a chance for people to comment, especially on
features of glTF.</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">The comments from one individual
follow.<br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><font color="blue"><br>
</font></div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><font color="blue">Some feedback from
my side:(unfortunately I only checked the comments in [3] after
writing this - there's definitely some overlap)<br>
</font>
<ul>
<li><font color="blue">It looks like while the X3D side counts
their annexes in, glTF extension mechanism is ignored for
the glTF side (otherwise a good amount of the "NO"s would
either be "YES" or "possible through extensions"). I think
an equal comparison would either exclude X3D annexes or
include glTF extensions.<br>
<br>
</font></li>
<li><font color="blue">While it's mentioned that X3D is an ISO
standard it's omitted that glTF is also an ISO standard.<br>
<br>
</font></li>
<li><font color="blue">I'm not sure what <i>Metadata
structures: partial, in separate files</i> means for glTF
- there's at least one extension for that.<br>
<br>
</font></li>
<li><font color="blue"><i>glTF: Transmission format designed for
applications rendering using WebGL or OpenGLES.</i> is
incorrect in my opinion, I think glTF is explicitly not tied
to a specific rendering backend, quite the contrary.<br>
<br>
</font></li>
<li><font color="blue"><i>glTF: Always changing to support the
fast changing GPU, a delivery system for highly optimized
mesh data for rendering. </i>kind of omits that glTF is
also an ISO standard and not "always changing". The
extension mechanism allows for flexibility but the core is
(rightfully) rigid.<br>
<br>
</font></li>
<li><font color="blue">One thing that bothers me in a lot of
Khronos communication around glTF is the focus on "efficient
transmission from server to client" and similar. Alternate
wordings are "The JPEG of 3D" and so on. Lots of companies
have started to adopt glTF as an interchange format as well
(including us), not just for last-mile delivery. I don't
think it strengthens glTF as a whole to "fight against that"
in communication and continually emphasizing that the format
is somehow only suitable for last-mile delivery.<br>
(compare also lots of the USDZ vs. glTF discussions at this
year's Siggraph)<br>
I understand this is a bigger discussion but wanted to
mention it here nonetheless. Almost all of the "Technology
Comparison Summaries" entries revolve around that, hinting
at glTF not being a good format for anything else.<br>
<br>
</font></li>
<li><font color="blue">Related to the above and some more of the
"NO"s: we're happily using glTF extensions for composition
of files, inline use of glbs inside glbs, and so on, there's
nothing blocking extensions from doing that. (I understand
glXF tries to specify that as separate format but still
don't fully understand why)</font><br>
</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Leonard Daly<br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:BY3PR13MB48846FD411E84FD8F5A34DB1C4419@BY3PR13MB4884.namprd13.prod.outlook.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Michalis thank you for your note. Please be assured
we that we have zero desire to overstate or incorrectly
characterize anything. Our previously sent draft did not
receive any responses. You saw our best effort update to
it. Happy to continue improving. Can we meet during this
Friday’s meeting?</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Thanks, Don</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Search for my handheld device</div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="ms-outlook-mobile-signature">
<div><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font style="font-size:11pt"
face="Calibri, sans-serif" color="#000000"><b>From:</b>
Michalis Kamburelis <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:michalis.kambi@gmail.com"><michalis.kambi@gmail.com></a><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, September 6, 2022 6:47:04 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Brutzman, Donald (Don) (CIV)
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:brutzman@nps.edu"><brutzman@nps.edu></a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> 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-rfc2396E" href="mailto:x3d-public@web3d.org"><x3d-public@web3d.org></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [x3d-public] X3D Working Group Minutes, 2
SEP 2022: X3D glTF feature comparison</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div class="BodyFragment"><font size="2"><span
style="font-size:11pt;">
<div class="PlainText">NPS WARNING: *external sender* verify
before acting.<br>
<br>
<br>
Hello,<br>
<br>
I read the <a
href="https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fspreadsheets%2Fd%2F1x0DnRtg33AuOA_aSl70L41Gq5m6TFt4t%2Fedit%23gid%3D1010586376&data=05%7C01%7Cbrutzman%40nps.edu%7Cb04d8dc972cb4f8430be08da900e5efe%7C6d936231a51740ea9199f7578963378e%7C0%7C0%7C637980688655942200%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=IqmTBR8XcyQT4f3uVk0Gp8rJJb7PvLoB7PcnVg5kiqw%3D&reserved=0"
moz-do-not-send="true">
https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fspreadsheets%2Fd%2F1x0DnRtg33AuOA_aSl70L41Gq5m6TFt4t%2Fedit%23gid%3D1010586376&data=05%7C01%7Cbrutzman%40nps.edu%7Cb04d8dc972cb4f8430be08da900e5efe%7C6d936231a51740ea9199f7578963378e%7C0%7C0%7C637980688655942200%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=IqmTBR8XcyQT4f3uVk0Gp8rJJb7PvLoB7PcnVg5kiqw%3D&reserved=0</a><br>
and have a number of comments. (sorry -- this is another
of Michalis'<br>
long emails :) ).<br>
<br>
My main objections are to the initial sections "Value
Proposition" and<br>
"Technology Comparison Summaries". To be frank, a lot of
the content<br>
there seems to be written with the mindset "X3D is better
than glTF,<br>
so let's list all the ways how it is better". Some
statements are<br>
unclear (and the lack of clarity seems to suggest that X3D
is better),<br>
some are just untrue IMHO. To be clear, in my opinion,
indeed X3D<br>
*has* some strengths over glTF, and same goes for the
other way<br>
around, glTF did some stuff better than X3D.<br>
<br>
A fair comparison of X3D vs glTF would be helpful (I have
written it<br>
myself too, but never published :) ). But the table above
is not very<br>
fair, it tries to push the agenda "X3D is better" a bit
too much. Let<br>
me point out what I think should be improved:<br>
<br>
1. "Value Proposition" - in general, the goals listed for
X3D are<br>
broad (wide variety of applications...), while the goals
and use-cases<br>
listed for glTF are narrow (efficient transmission,
appropriate if you<br>
want to view in web browser).<br>
<br>
This does not reflect reality in my experience. Neither
does it<br>
reflect glTF mission statements at the beginning of<br>
<a
href="https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fregistry.khronos.org%2FglTF%2Fspecs%2F2.0%2FglTF-2.0.html&data=05%7C01%7Cbrutzman%40nps.edu%7Cb04d8dc972cb4f8430be08da900e5efe%7C6d936231a51740ea9199f7578963378e%7C0%7C0%7C637980688655942200%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=BRIUyLBNBkdzH7%2BEE9UDB73gL4NmcVEiErOn%2FU01WLg%3D&reserved=0"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fregistry.khronos.org%2FglTF%2Fspecs%2F2.0%2FglTF-2.0.html&data=05%7C01%7Cbrutzman%40nps.edu%7Cb04d8dc972cb4f8430be08da900e5efe%7C6d936231a51740ea9199f7578963378e%7C0%7C0%7C637980688655942200%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=BRIUyLBNBkdzH7%2BEE9UDB73gL4NmcVEiErOn%2FU01WLg%3D&reserved=0</a>
, "glTF is<br>
an API-neutral runtime asset delivery format. glTF bridges
the gap<br>
between 3D content creation tools and modern graphics
applications by<br>
providing an efficient, extensible, interoperable format
for the<br>
transmission and loading of 3D content.".<br>
<br>
The practical fact, IMHO, is that glTF is here exactly
like X3D. It's<br>
just a format for 3D models, it can be used with a variety
of<br>
applications, on any platforms (certainly not only to view
the models<br>
in web browser; e.g. game engines, including Castle Game
Engine, allow<br>
to use glTF as 3D model format on desktops).<br>
<br>
So I would suggest to place there the glTF statement I
cited above<br>
("glTF is an API-neutral runtime asset delivery format.
glTF<br>
bridges..."), and in general make this section simply
honestly state:<br>
the goals and usecases of X3D and glTF largely overlap.
They are both<br>
open standards for 3D models and can be used in a variety
of<br>
applications, use-cases, platforms.<br>
<br>
2. "Technology Comparison Summaries" - in general,
statements there<br>
again suffer from "a bit unclear, in favor of X3D and
disfavor of<br>
glTF".<br>
<br>
- X3D advantage: "X3D: Full Inline support for glTF
features,<br>
especially compressed geometry plus advanced lighting
model planned<br>
for X3D version 4." - in X3D we have it, but it is not
complete as<br>
this statement suggests. In particular we don't yet have
in X3D spec<br>
any way to specify binary per-vertex data or "compressed
geometry".<br>
This is a work in progress, with some browser-specific
extensions, not<br>
more yet ( <a
href="https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fmichaliskambi%2Fx3d-tests%2Fwiki%2FBinary-meshes&data=05%7C01%7Cbrutzman%40nps.edu%7Cb04d8dc972cb4f8430be08da900e5efe%7C6d936231a51740ea9199f7578963378e%7C0%7C0%7C637980688655942200%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=0fQBGBo5fLqiC%2Fr73X%2B9ucLw7ihfq4oDT1L9pTowmHw%3D&reserved=0"
moz-do-not-send="true">
https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fmichaliskambi%2Fx3d-tests%2Fwiki%2FBinary-meshes&data=05%7C01%7Cbrutzman%40nps.edu%7Cb04d8dc972cb4f8430be08da900e5efe%7C6d936231a51740ea9199f7578963378e%7C0%7C0%7C637980688655942200%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=0fQBGBo5fLqiC%2Fr73X%2B9ucLw7ihfq4oDT1L9pTowmHw%3D&reserved=0</a><br>
). We have not yet figured out how 100% of glTF features
express as<br>
X3D (as I say explicitly on<br>
<a
href="https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fmichaliskambi%2Fx3d-tests%2Fwiki%2FConverting-glTF-to-X3D&data=05%7C01%7Cbrutzman%40nps.edu%7Cb04d8dc972cb4f8430be08da900e5efe%7C6d936231a51740ea9199f7578963378e%7C0%7C0%7C637980688655942200%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Reum%2Bn0%2F8i5AnwiANMh%2BAJwct5u6OIyX7ErmGrif414%3D&reserved=0"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fmichaliskambi%2Fx3d-tests%2Fwiki%2FConverting-glTF-to-X3D&data=05%7C01%7Cbrutzman%40nps.edu%7Cb04d8dc972cb4f8430be08da900e5efe%7C6d936231a51740ea9199f7578963378e%7C0%7C0%7C637980688655942200%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Reum%2Bn0%2F8i5AnwiANMh%2BAJwct5u6OIyX7ErmGrif414%3D&reserved=0</a><br>
).<br>
<br>
I would suggest to change it to "X3D: Inline support
for many glTF<br>
features, especially advanced physically-based materials."<br>
<br>
- "glTF: Transmission format designed for applications
rendering using<br>
WebGL or OpenGLES." This tries to suggest that glTF
usefullness is<br>
narrow. It is in conflict with actual glTF statement I
cited above,<br>
"glTF is an API-neutral runtime asset delivery format.".
glTF makes<br>
sense regardless if you use WebGL or OpenGLES. Yes, it
used some<br>
constants / naming from WebGL / OpenGLES, but it's fully
implementable<br>
and understandable in the context of any graphics API -
including e.g.<br>
Vulkan and Direct3D.<br>
<br>
I would suggest to change it to "glTF is an
API-neutral runtime<br>
asset delivery format."<br>
<br>
- "glTF: Always changing to support the fast changing GPU,
a delivery<br>
system for highly optimized mesh data for rendering." -
not true, or<br>
at least unclear statement. glTF is not "always changing".
They care<br>
about backward compatibility a *lot* and glTF 2.0 has been
stable for<br>
many years, without any breaking changes.<br>
<br>
I would suggest to just remove this statement.<br>
<br>
- "glTF: Backward compatibility, archivability, are not
listed as<br>
specification goals." - not true. In practice, of course
they care<br>
about backward compatibility. And it is mentioned in spec
explicitly:<br>
<a
href="https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fregistry.khronos.org%2FglTF%2Fspecs%2F2.0%2FglTF-2.0.html%23versioning&data=05%7C01%7Cbrutzman%40nps.edu%7Cb04d8dc972cb4f8430be08da900e5efe%7C6d936231a51740ea9199f7578963378e%7C0%7C0%7C637980688655942200%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2BxtVPG9WjSSqdnQFEZ%2FjLo%2F03m7IawhJ%2FDDrodLxMkc%3D&reserved=0"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fregistry.khronos.org%2FglTF%2Fspecs%2F2.0%2FglTF-2.0.html%23versioning&data=05%7C01%7Cbrutzman%40nps.edu%7Cb04d8dc972cb4f8430be08da900e5efe%7C6d936231a51740ea9199f7578963378e%7C0%7C0%7C637980688655942200%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2BxtVPG9WjSSqdnQFEZ%2FjLo%2F03m7IawhJ%2FDDrodLxMkc%3D&reserved=0</a>
,<br>
"Any updates made to the glTF Specification in a minor
version MUST be<br>
backward and forward compatible....."<br>
<br>
I would suggest to change this statement: "glTF:
Backward<br>
compatibility is addressed by the spec, any updates made
to the glTF<br>
Specification in a minor version MUST be backward and
forward<br>
compatible."<br>
<br>
3. "Picking (touch/over TouchSensor, PickableGroup)" -
glTF should<br>
have "No". (So this part is wrong in favor of glTF).
There's work to<br>
introduce such features on top of glTF, but glTF spec does
not have<br>
it.<br>
<br>
4. "Clipping planes" - glTF should have "No".<br>
<br>
5. "Metadata Structures" - glTF does have it, in much the
same way as X3D.<br>
<br>
- Essentially anything can have additional informatiom,
with key-value<br>
or deeper structure:<br>
<a
href="https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fregistry.khronos.org%2FglTF%2Fspecs%2F2.0%2FglTF-2.0.html%23reference-extras&data=05%7C01%7Cbrutzman%40nps.edu%7Cb04d8dc972cb4f8430be08da900e5efe%7C6d936231a51740ea9199f7578963378e%7C0%7C0%7C637980688655942200%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=4RrMuXIvbjbaDpH80Dm2bKkgzlg7%2BoXunm9iSe3gNgY%3D&reserved=0"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fregistry.khronos.org%2FglTF%2Fspecs%2F2.0%2FglTF-2.0.html%23reference-extras&data=05%7C01%7Cbrutzman%40nps.edu%7Cb04d8dc972cb4f8430be08da900e5efe%7C6d936231a51740ea9199f7578963378e%7C0%7C0%7C637980688655942200%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=4RrMuXIvbjbaDpH80Dm2bKkgzlg7%2BoXunm9iSe3gNgY%3D&reserved=0</a><br>
. This is quite similar in practice to how X3D MetadataXxx
nodes are<br>
used.<br>
<br>
- There's also "asset" for per-file properties:<br>
<a
href="https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fregistry.khronos.org%2FglTF%2Fspecs%2F2.0%2FglTF-2.0.html%23asset&data=05%7C01%7Cbrutzman%40nps.edu%7Cb04d8dc972cb4f8430be08da900e5efe%7C6d936231a51740ea9199f7578963378e%7C0%7C0%7C637980688655942200%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=dmY4m20QxOcWIh4gMU3TVlpWX0AjRRfwTqqK6SiW3D8%3D&reserved=0"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fregistry.khronos.org%2FglTF%2Fspecs%2F2.0%2FglTF-2.0.html%23asset&data=05%7C01%7Cbrutzman%40nps.edu%7Cb04d8dc972cb4f8430be08da900e5efe%7C6d936231a51740ea9199f7578963378e%7C0%7C0%7C637980688655942200%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=dmY4m20QxOcWIh4gMU3TVlpWX0AjRRfwTqqK6SiW3D8%3D&reserved=0</a>
. This<br>
is quite similar to common usage of X3D "META" statements.<br>
<br>
- And the "extras" are mentioned above are really used in
practice.<br>
Blender exports Blender's "Custom properties" to glTF
"extras". (Which<br>
is actually better than Blender->X3D exporter, that
doesn't write X3D<br>
MetadataXxx, although it could.)<br>
<br>
6. "Inline" - this is correct, glTF doesn't have it. But
you can<br>
mention <a
href="https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FKhronosGroup%2FglXF&data=05%7C01%7Cbrutzman%40nps.edu%7Cb04d8dc972cb4f8430be08da900e5efe%7C6d936231a51740ea9199f7578963378e%7C0%7C0%7C637980688655942200%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=M1zkHjoZUoGzC0HGZNkba2HAcOXmAMfszDR8Rdr9Fv8%3D&reserved=0"
moz-do-not-send="true">
https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FKhronosGroup%2FglXF&data=05%7C01%7Cbrutzman%40nps.edu%7Cb04d8dc972cb4f8430be08da900e5efe%7C6d936231a51740ea9199f7578963378e%7C0%7C0%7C637980688655942200%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=M1zkHjoZUoGzC0HGZNkba2HAcOXmAMfszDR8Rdr9Fv8%3D&reserved=0</a>
-- it's not yet<br>
officially endorsed, but it's an idea to address exactly
this, i.e.<br>
compose world from multiple glTF files.<br>
<br>
7. Let me add some things I consider missing to have a
good picture:<br>
<br>
"Efficient representation of mesh in binary format"<br>
X3D: not (yet!)<br>
glTF: yes<br>
<br>
"Cubemap textures, including generated cubemaps"<br>
X3D: yes<br>
glTF: no<br>
<br>
"Lights"<br>
X3D: yes<br>
glTF: not in core spec (but in extensions)<br>
<br>
"Environmental effects, like fog and background"<br>
X3D: yes<br>
glTF: no<br>
<br>
"Full-featured and actively maintained Blender exporter,
with support<br>
for PBR materials, animations, skinned animations"<br>
X3D: not (yet!)<br>
glTF: yes<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Michalis<br>
<br>
sob., 3 wrz 2022 o 01:10 Brutzman, Donald (Don) (CIV)<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:brutzman@nps.edu"><brutzman@nps.edu></a> napisał(a):<br>
><br>
> Spreadsheet PDF with corrected date (for today)
attached.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> all the best, Don<br>
><br>
> --<br>
><br>
> Don Brutzman Naval Postgraduate School, Code
USW/Br <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:brutzman@nps.edu">brutzman@nps.edu</a><br>
><br>
> Watkins 270, MOVES Institute, Monterey CA 93943-5000
USA +1.831.656.2149<br>
><br>
> X3D graphics, virtual worlds, Navy robotics https://
faculty.nps.edu/brutzman<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> x3d-public mailing list<br>
> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:x3d-public@web3d.org">x3d-public@web3d.org</a><br>
> <a
href="http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org</a><br>
</div>
</span></font></div>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-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>
<p><br>
</p>
<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>
President, Daly Realism - <i>Creating the Future</i>
</font></div>
</body>
</html>