[x3d-public] protos for v4: x3dom + cobweb?

John Carlson yottzumm at gmail.com
Thu Jan 28 07:34:33 PST 2016


I think it would be simpler to get my prototype expander and routing to and from scripts well tested, deployed, validated and encoded.  Then it can be released as part of the X3DOM package instead of trying to merge two codebases.  We would be providing people with a full JSON alternative to XML.  But that’s just me.  But unwrapping prototypes may be inefficient.

I already have some of my prototypes working.  See cobweb.json @ http://coderextreme.net/X3DJSONLD/ <http://coderextreme.net/X3DJSONLD/>  rubik.json and NancyPrototype.json are others.  Disable the prototype expander to see the difference.  I think where I may be lacking is passing SFNodes and MFNodes around.  Should I try some of your recent examples against it?   Can you provide me with a list and permission to publish on my site and @ github?  Thanks!  It’s likely that I would be publishing derived JSON and not the original X3D XML or VRML.

Note that I don’t have ExternProtoDeclare or including JSON files working yet.

If you’re looking at the X3DOM and Cobweb code, care to share some of the structures?  Can you give more detail on how your idea would work?  How would you keep both systems up-to-date with each other, i.e., routing.?


> On Jan 28, 2016, at 10:06 AM, doug sanden <highaspirations at hotmail.com> wrote:
> So to make heterogenous node systems work there would need to be an efficient system for wrapping/unwrapping.
> For example passing a DOM based node on the interface of a non-DOM proto, for use in non-DOM VRMLscript.
> To be efficient, perhaps the DOM nodes need to have a DOM interface over a compatible non-DOM implementation. Then passing in, it's efficient to unwrap?
>> Think of Cobweb as a classic VRML silo ported to the web.  At least that’s what it seems like to me.  You must use VRML types in your VRMLscript, it’s not JavaScript.
>> But yeah, if I read your subject right, you want to port Cobweb protos to X3DOM.  I believe scripts would have to be ported as well.  It might be worth investigating.
>> John
>>> On Jan 28, 2016, at 9:19 AM, John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> AFAIK, Cobweb does not do DOM or JQuery.  Protos can be used with X3DOM, using my prototype expander for JSON (in beta), but not VRMLscript (partial implementation, alpha or pre alpha).
>>> We need to figure out how to route to and from scripts in X3DOM.  See my many postings pleading for help.  If you would want to help, I can show you the ropes.
>>> The alternative to Protos for X3DOM is web components, which is what the X3DOM folks are proposing.
>>> John
>>>> On Jan 28, 2016, at 9:13 AM, doug sanden <highaspirations at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Q. could protos for V4 be in cobweb format?
>>>> -Doug
>>>> Goal: keep the jQuery/DOM crowd happy, but just up to the interface of a proto, not its body.
>>>> x I have not studied any techical details of either x3dom or cobweb, I have no idea if its doable/practical
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160128/d8f3196e/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the x3d-public mailing list