[X3D-Public] got MultiTexture and MultiTextureTransform example scenes?

[Don Brutzman]

On 4/4/2013 12:15 AM, Dave A wrote:
> Don,
>
> Thanks, good to know.
>
> I'm working on an exporter for Unity. I'm not sure if I'm outputting 'to
> spec' as I have no way to test it visually, if I can't find a compliant
> player. Relying on X3D-Edit will assure me that my syntax is right (or
> wrong), but I can't tell if it looks right. And from a previous post,
> using DOT3 or whatever is not really what I would want, or what people
> do these days, anyway.

Another X3D-Edit feature:  right click within scene, can launch to all 
browsers you have installed.
Configuration screen for player preferences is provided (with latest 
defaults kept up to date).

https://savage.nps.edu/X3D-Edit/images/OptionsX3dViewersSelectFromScene.png
https://savage.nps.edu/X3D-Edit/images/OptionsX3dViewersPanel.png

Another way to test syntactically correct (which you likely know about 
already) is the online X3D Validator.  Same tests as found within X3D-Edit.

https://savage.nps.edu/X3dValidator

> If everyone is going in different directions, maybe because the world
> has changed since that spec was written (and quite understandably so),
> we should look at revising the spec.
>
> I'm not really an expert at shaders, which seems to be the way the world
> is going. And every shader can have its own set of parameters. This make
> players more likely to support (?) but makes is quite difficult for
> interchange, especially when interchange wants something minimally
> complete.
>
> I normally like to write to 'immersive' or some such profile, so I can
> see what my file contains, in theory. But I can see now where a
> simplified Interchange multi-texturing and/or shader set of nodes/fields
> might be an option.

it would be helpful to get more public examples to help the community 
explore those possibilities.

> That, or as X3DOM and others have done, use a more generic, universal
> shader that can take some common surface types.
>
> I would bet that most materials ever used are diffuse, bump-diffuse, and
> bump-diffuse-specular, perhaps add emissive to that as well. With
> transparency (both in the diffuse bitmap and the main color). More
> exotic surfaces (water, glass, plasma-lava-antigrav polyalloy) would
> require shaders, custom ones.  Kudos for shader support!
>
> Unity has a ShaderLab shader syntax which compiles down to DirectX,
> OpenGL and OpenGLES. Perhaps something like that would be needed for
> true interchange and universal interoperability.

interesting approach, presumably at
http://docs.unity3d.com/Documentation/Components/SL-Shader.html

might be good to add this to our supported shader capabilities at
Programmable shaders component
http://www.web3d.org/files/specifications/19775-1/V3.3/Part01/components/shaders.html

meanwhile i like the reverse notion that modelers could save their 
scenes to X3D without deep knowledge of (or even any idea about) shader 
programs, and that X3D player implementers can use whatever shader 
approach they want to render.

> For my purposes, I've given in to using META tags to get my data across.
> Which is 1 - ok for my project, as I'm doing both export and import, and
> 2 - sucks for anyone else that wants to import or export to this system.

there are also the typed MetadataFloat, MetadataString etc. nodes for 
strongly typed metadata in context.

http://www.web3d.org/files/specifications/19775-1/V3.3/Part01/components/core.html#DataTypesForMetadata
http://www.web3d.org/files/specifications/19775-1/V3.3/Part01/components/core.html#X3DMetadataObject
http://www.web3d.org/files/specifications/19775-1/V3.3/Part01/components/core.html#Nodereference
and
http://x3dgraphics.com/chapters/Chapter15-MetadataInformation.html

> I'd really like to see the extensions that Bitmanagement and Fraunhofer
> have done (in IR and X3DOM) given a good deal of consideration. Also
> consider the current direction and likely future of this, and needs of
> 'for display' and 'for interchange' taken into account.

the mix of X3D version 3.4 (for incremental additions) and X3D version 
4.0 (for major evolutionary changes) is our two-track approach to begin 
adding and accepting such improvements.

> I wish I could be more help, but as I said, I'm not really a shader
> expert. I just know I need to get a bumped-diffuse-specular object saved
> and loaded again!
>
> But if you do happen to want my input on this, I will be glad to provide
> it.

step by step we go.  thanks Dave.

all the best, Don
-- 
Don Brutzman  Naval Postgraduate School, Code USW/Br       brutzman at nps.edu
Watkins 270,  MOVES Institute, Monterey CA 93943-5000 USA   +1.831.656.2149
X3D graphics, virtual worlds, navy robotics http://faculty.nps.edu/brutzman