[x3d-public] announce: X3D Java Scene Authoring Interface (SAI) open source, initial review release

[John Carlson]

At this point, I just have basic setters, getters, add children, remove
children (no implementation for children) and possible constructors (needs
work for abstract base classes).   So I have Python which generates
SAI-like stuff.   I also have JavaScript which takes XML DOM encoding and
produces Python for a document.  I do need to look over the Object Model or
model schema to see if I'm missing something obvious.  Statements come to
mind.

John

On Nov 16, 2016 2:57 AM, "Don Brutzman" <brutzman at nps.edu> wrote:

> (belated response) Joe, thanks for this offer.
>
> We will get to SAI specification improvements in the coming year.  It has
> been a looong time since the last review.  For the next few months, effort
> will focus on X3D Object Model and implementations such as this.
>
> Am hoping that our next revision of SAI will also align with HTML5/DOM.
> Plenty more discussion, implementation and evaluation lies ahead of us to
> get there.  It is pretty cool that John Carlson has a Python draft, and
> also that any architectural changes in X3D v4 will be directly
> implementable in autogenerated codebases.
>
> Meanwhile first of 2 H-Anim spec editors meetings is tomorrow.  8)
>
> Onward we go.  Looking forward to future diligence that updates reviews
> like the one you posted - again thanks.
>
> v/r Don
>
>
> On 10/26/2016 6:57 AM, Joe D Williams wrote:
>
>> How about we look at abstract SAI, EcmaScript SAI Language Binding and
>>> Java SAI Language Binding together on a working-group call (ensuring that
>>> Dick is present) and decide on similar/common structure for each
>>> specification?
>>>
>>
>> Will these help. Out of data but I am willing to update if it will help.
>>
>> http://www.hypermultimedia.com/x3d/Quick/SAIABSDEFS.htm
>>
>> http://www.hypermultimedia.com/x3d/Quick/SAIDEFS.htm
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Joe
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Don Brutzman" <brutzman at nps.edu>
>> To: "Roy Walmsley" <roy.walmsley at ntlworld.com>; "'X3D Graphics public
>> mailinglist'" <x3d-public at web3d.org>
>> Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2016 4:24 PM
>> Subject: Re: [x3d-public] announce: X3D Java Scene Authoring Interface
>> (SAI) open source, initial review release
>>
>>
>> On 7/2/2016 8:31 AM, Roy Walmsley wrote:
>>
>>> Don,
>>>
>>> This is great work done. Well done.
>>>
>>
>> thank you Roy.
>>
>> You know me - can't help but be picky!
>>>
>>
>> um, if the details weren't important, they wouldn't be the details. 8)
>>
>> I looked at the  draft Annex B for the 19777-2 Java language binding. I
>>> looked at the title of the annex, B.1.1 Introduction, and then Table B.1
>>> Topics. As you can see there is a mismatch.
>>>
>>
>> OK... here are links to compare autogenerated annex with original
>> specification annex.
>>
>> Autogenerated: draft Annex B Node type interfaces
>> http://www.web3d.org/specifications/java/draftJavaLanguageBi
>> ndingAnnexes/Part2/nodeTypeInterfaces.html
>>
>> (former original Abstract node interfaces)
>> http://www.web3d.org/documents/specifications/19777-2/V3.0/
>> Part2/abstracts.html
>>
>> I see two alternatives to resolve this:
>>>
>>> 1)      Change the title and the introduction to reflect the contents.
>>>
>>> 2)      Separate the contents into smaller annexes. For example,
>>> “Abstract type interfaces”,
>>>
>>> Now look at B.3 Auxiliary node type interfaces. And then the topics
>>> within it. These are not node types. They would be better titled ‘Auxiliary
>>> type interfaces’.
>>>
>>> I also think that field interfaces need to be first. Look at 19775,
>>> 19776 series standards. Fields are derived before nodes, because all nodes
>>> need fields, and only some fields need nodes.
>>>
>>
>> These seem like reasonable improvements.  Usage of the terms nodes,
>> interfaces and fields can be slippery - there is already a rename in the
>> annex title pending.
>>
>> However, since options (1) and (2) above each relate to specification
>> document structure, am hesitating to make piecemeal improvements that might
>> lead to other inconsistencies elsewhere/later.  Don't want to chase a
>> problem by possibly pushing inconsistencies around.
>>
>> How about we look at abstract SAI, EcmaScript SAI Language Binding and
>> Java SAI Language Binding together on a working-group call (ensuring that
>> Dick is present) and decide on similar/common structure for each
>> specification?
>>
>> Given the importance of getting this right, getting the specification
>> organizations reconciled and documented in Mantis will help.  I can then
>> easily change the original-spec titles in the autogenerated annexes to
>> match.
>>
>
> 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/brutzma
> n
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20161116/a9d933fe/attachment.html>