[x3d-public] Behavior of X3D's DOM integration

[Max Limper]

Dear Kristian,

thanks for letting us know that this doesn't behave correctly in X3DOM 
right now (opened a ticket: https://github.com/x3dom/x3dom/issues/489), 
and thanks for pointing out this open issue.

I also feel that solution 1 (removing the DEFed node invalidates USEs, 
nothing rendered) is the cleanest way of solving this.

Regards,
Max



On 15.04.2015 12:38, Kristian Sons wrote:
> Dear X3D community,
>
> although this is a question concerncing the X3DOM integration model, I 
> post this quesion to the X3D mailing list, because I know that the 
> consortium is really interested in adopting this integration model in 
> a future version of X3D.
>
> I am be interested in the intended behavior when synchronization 
> between the DOM representation and internal X3D scene graph is 
> necessary. The X3DOM paper is not really explicit here.
>
> Let me use the simple DEF/USE example from x3dom.org as example:
> http://examples.x3dom.org/example/x3dom_defUse.xhtml
>
> The scene has to <Shape> nodes, one defining the Shape below 
> Transform#bar, one that is reusing the Shape below Transform#bar.
>
> Now I remove the defining node (using jQuery syntax):
> $("Transform#bar Shape").remove();
>
> Now I have an invalid X3D scene in the DOM with a single <Shape> node 
> pointing to a definition that does not exists. The currently included 
> X3DOM implementation 1.6.2-dev produces an error, stops rendering 
> (displaying both shapes) and gets inactive (I guess this is a bug) . 
> Former versions would just render the "USE" node using the previous 
> definition.
>
> What the intended behavior? I could think of three behaviors:
>
> 1. The USE node has a dangling reference. Consequently nothing is 
> rendered at all (corresponds to a reinitialization of the scene state 
> based on the new DOM representation)
> 2. The USE node becomes the DEF node (the DOM corresponds to removing 
> the node via SAI and then serializing the scene)
> 3. The USE node is still rendering the referenced shape but the 
> definition does not appear in the DOM (the run-time corresponds to 
> removing the node via SAI, but the DOM representation differs)
>
> The first behavior seems the most logical variant for me.
>
> Any opinions on this?
>
> Thanks,
>   Kristian
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> _______________________________________________________________________________
>
> Kristian Sons
> Deutsches Forschungszentrum für Künstliche Intelligenz GmbH, DFKI
> Agenten und Simulierte Realität
> Campus, Geb. D 3 2, Raum 0.77
> 66123 Saarbrücken, Germany
>
> Phone: +49 681 85775-3833
> Phone: +49 681 302-3833
> Fax:   +49 681 85775–2235
> kristian.sons at dfki.de
> http://www.xml3d.org
>
> Geschäftsführung: Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Wolfgang Wahlster (Vorsitzender)
> Dr. Walter Olthoff
>
> Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes
> Amtsgericht Kaiserslautern, HRB 2313
> _______________________________________________________________________________
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> x3d-public mailing list
> x3d-public at web3d.org
> http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/attachments/20150415/4b3dfbfd/attachment.html>