[X3D-Public] Fwd: Re: [X3D] X3D HTML5meetingdiscussions:Declarative 3D interest group at W3C

[Philipp Slusallek]

Hi,

XFlow is not really part of the distribution yet (there might be some
code in there but its certainly not complete). For XFlow please wait for
the next release.

	Philipp

Am 04.01.2011 21:36, schrieb GLG:
>> RTSG core does not implement X3D specification, i.e. 
>> node type hierarchy, user can create arbitrary
>> specification on top of RTSG-2. In this way XML3D and Xflow
>> are implemented.
> 
> Hello Dmitri,
> 
> I am confused. In what way Xflow is implemented? According
> to xml3d.org, RTSG2 and RTfact are included in the binary
> download (chrome.exe). Would I be correct to think that this
> constitute the Xflow implementation? If so, how then can I
> differentiate between the native and the WebGL
> implementation? Furthermore, the page source for the iX Cube
> example summons the xml3d.js script, and removing that
> script seems to break the mouse interaction. So that leaves
> me to believe the sample runs off the WebGL implementation,
> in turn leading me to think that I need to compile the
> source with RTSG in order to implement Fflow. You might be
> able to save me some time with this, if you where I am in
> error. 
> 
> Thank you,
> Lauren
> 
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Dmitri Rubinstein [mailto:rubinstein at cs.uni-
>> saarland.de]
>> Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 7:04 PM
>> To: info at 3dnetproductions.com
>> Cc: 'Joe D Williams'; 'Chris Marrin'; 'Philipp Slusallek';
>> cbullard at hiwaay.net; x3d-public at web3d.org
>> Subject: Re: [X3D-Public] Fwd: Re: [X3D] X3D
>> HTML5meetingdiscussions:Declarative 3D interest group at
>> W3C
>>
>> Hello all. I am the lead developer of the scene graph
>> engine RTSG-2 used
>> for native XML3D implementation integrated into WebKit and
>> Firefox.
>> Since I see in the discussion interest in a scene graph
>> engine to
>> speed-up things, I decided to tell about some of the
>> features of our
>> scene graph engine.
>>
>> RTSG-2 engine implements large parts of X3D SAI services in
>> C++ and
>> additionally some extensions that are not specified in SAI
>> spec. So
>> XML3D specification actually runs on top of X3D-compatible
>> engine.
>> However, to be clear, RTSG-2 core only implements basic
>> X3D/VRML
>> concepts like nodes, data fields (e.g. SFFloat) and
>> MFNode/SFNode
>> fields. Also implementation of all X3D standard fields is
>> available as
>> part of the core. RTSG core does not implement X3D
>> specification, i.e.
>> node type hierarchy, user can create arbitrary
>> specification on top of
>> RTSG-2. In this way XML3D and Xflow are implemented. So I
>> see even a
>> possibility to implement X3DOM on top of it. The only
>> missing concepts
>> are ROUTEs, PROTOs and IMPORT/EXPORT features of X3D. Since
>> XML3D does
>> not need them we didn't implemented them, but it should be
>> possible.
>>
>> You can freely get a source code for RTSG and for both
>> modified browsers
>> here :
>> http://graphics.cs.uni-
>> sb.de/fileadmin/cguds/projects/xml3d/browser/src/0.4/
>>
>> Publications about RTSG:
>>
>> http://graphics.cs.uni-saarland.de/index.php?id=228
>>
>> http://graphics.cs.uni-
>> saarland.de/~rubinste/works/diplom.pdf
>>
>> Greetings
>>
>> Dmitri Rubinstein
>>
>> GLG schrieb:
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> Joe wrote;
>>>> I think I agree except in the near term I see an
>>>> opportunity to offer
>>>> some level of speedup by offering an opertional 'engine'
>>>> that can
>>>> speed things up by doing some details in fast code.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes I was thinking that too from the beginning of this
>>> thread. That may not align with the stated objectives
>>> though, but can possibly help speed up development time.
>> I
>>> just saw a rather large list of 'game engines' on
>> Wikipedia
>>> not long ago. I am not personally familiar with any
>>> particular engine but there could be something fast and
>>> light out there that can help. An X3D engine would be
>> nice.
>>> How about FreeWRL (http://freewrl.sourceforge.net)? I put
>>> this here just in case. I have both XML3D and X3DOM now
>>> running off WebGL. I'll go with that until I run into
>>> trouble.
>>>
>>>
>>>> tactics. Now it seems the html browsers are all up in
>> the
>>>> air about
>>>> security of <object> and @sandbox and others so we need
>>>> some special
>>>> tricks to get the X3D object talking to the DOM
>>>
>>>
>>> You are reading my mind again, which brings me to my
>> first
>>> question. I'd like to ask Philipp and Johannes if they
>> know
>>> of any security features currently defeated in Mozilla in
>>> order for the above to work. Also, same question when
>>> running with XFlow.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> We saw from Ajax3D that XHR
>>>> is a winner and so naturally would play some part in
>> future
>>>> X3D networking tactics.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes funny that you mention it. I plan on hooking up the
>>> X3Daemon MU Server as soon as feasible.
>>>
>>>
>>> My last question is on the subject of physics. That has
>>> barely been touched. I was wondering if some thought was
>>> giving to it. Basic stuff at first like collision and
>>> gravity.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Lauren
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> X3D-Public mailing list
>>> X3D-Public at web3d.org
>>> http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> X3D-Public mailing list
> X3D-Public at web3d.org
> http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org