[x3d-public] X3D agenda 4 DEC 2020: resolving X3D4 endgame issues

Fri Dec 4 00:17:14 PST 2020

Any example should not rely on running on localhost, port 80.  I rarely run
on port 80.

I'm looking for a fairly self-contained example.

John

On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 2:02 AM John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com> wrote:

> Specifically, it would be cool to have one example where an .x3d file
> inlines a a glTF file, and we see if X3DOM and X_ITE handle the Inline
> right in the context of X3DJSONLD (passes the Inline to the DOM layer
> without checking for a Scene inside glTF files).
>
> While I had toggled between handling the Inline myself and passing it on,
> I am pretty firmly entrenched in passing the Inline onto the player/DOM
> handler.
>
> Thanks,
>
> John
>
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 1:25 AM John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Test examples of different uses of new Inline features welcome!
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> John
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 11:14 PM Don Brutzman <brutzman at nps.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Big agenda but milestone deadline is looming and all issues are
>>> familiar.  Thanks for all advance meeting preparation, we hope to proceed
>>> rapidly.
>>>
>>> We now meet one hour later than before:  09-1000 Pacific time.
>>>
>>> [0.1] Web3D Teleconference Information
>>>        https://www.web3d.org/member/teleconference-information
>>>
>>> > Please use the following link for all Web3D Consortium Meetings.
>>> >
>>> > Join URL:
>>> https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81634670698?pwd=a1VPeU5tN01rc21Oa3hScUlHK0Rxdz09
>>>
>>> Prior minutes:
>>>
>>> [0.2] [x3d-public] X3D working group minutes: scheduling, conference
>>> quicklook, specification work planning, X3D4 finalization
>>>
>>> https://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/2020-November/014002.html
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> 1. X3D4 topics
>>>
>>> [1.0] X3D4
>>>        https://www.web3D.org/x3d4
>>>
>>> Changes to X3D4 specification on members-only github are also being
>>> refreshed daily at
>>>
>>> [1.1] X3D4 Working Draft 3
>>>
>>> https://www.web3d.org/specifications/X3Dv4Draft/ISO-IEC19775-1v4-WD3/
>>>
>>> Corresponding pristine text in preparation for Web3D Consortium member
>>> ballot is currently being autogenerated along with a log of both
>>> corrections and remaining issues.
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> a. MIDI 2.0 and Web Midi accepted. Audio and sound changes complete,
>>> checked in.
>>>
>>> [2] [x3d-public] X3D4 Sound Component and MIDI 2.0 review: accepted for
>>> ballot
>>>
>>> https://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/2020-December/014188.html
>>>
>>> Many thanks for many reviews and multiple endorsements.
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> b. Continued review and editing of prose for clarity in Lighting and
>>> Shape components, with focus on glTF support.
>>>
>>> [3] Various comments reading X3Dv4 current working draft (WD3 in GitHub
>>> repository)
>>>
>>> https://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/2020-December/014189.html
>>>
>>> No problems noted but more editing work needed.  Michalis has the baton
>>> for some technical clarifications, then Dick and Don will continue working
>>> on prose phrasing to meet ISO editorial conventions.
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> c.  Gamma correction
>>>
>>> Of note in this long-running issue:
>>> - no single entity (hardware, software, browser, author) can yet drive
>>> to a cross-platform solution.
>>> - stating accepted expectation (gamma correction is expected) might lead
>>> to false sense of optimism.
>>> - still complex but some further progress might be expected with XR
>>> activity next year.
>>>
>>> and realization that there is something we can mostly control: rendering
>>> screen to image, allowing visual checking/comparison and also unit
>>> testing.  No requirement that all browsers look exactly the same -
>>> rendering pipelines have some leeway - but at least we can test compare and
>>> keep improving.  Especially useful with addition of physically based and
>>> non-photorealistic (unlit) rendering.
>>>
>>> [4] [x3d-public] [...] Gamma Correction for X3D4 final draft
>>>
>>> https://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/2020-November/014103.html
>>>
>>> summarized as
>>>
>>> > There are 2 spec choices below: acknowledging norms by simply stating
>>> that gamma correction is typically expected,
>>> > or else continuing to say nothing.
>>>
>>> Check consensus: adding no additional statement still seems most
>>> pragmatic?
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> d. Putting default duration bounds on url refresh activity
>>>
>>> Clearly we don't want a lot of unclosed 3D scenes and window frames
>>> becoming zombie network loads (or even Denial Of Service DOS threats).
>>>
>>> [5] [x3d-public] X3D4 security-related field addition: X3DUrlObject
>>> refreshTimeLimit
>>>
>>> http://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/2020-November/014182.html
>>>
>>> with John Carlson's follow-on reply exploring rationale and examples
>>> further.
>>>
>>> Recommendation: include this field (X3DUrlObject refreshTimeLimit) as a
>>> prudent security precaution.
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> e. References review requested
>>>
>>> [6.0] [x3d-public] X3D4 endgame review: normative references and
>>> informative bibliography
>>>        http:s//
>>> web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/2020-November/014122.html
>>>
>>> Note several replies that are not part of the thread per se.
>>>
>>> [6.1] X3D4 Architecture, Normative references
>>>
>>> https://www.web3d.org/specifications/X3Dv4Draft/ISO-IEC19775-1v4-WD3/Part01/references.html
>>>
>>> [6.2] X3D4 Architecture, (Informative) bibliography
>>>
>>> https://www.web3d.org/specifications/X3Dv4Draft/ISO-IEC19775-1v4-WD3/Part01/bibliography.html
>>>
>>> Continuing review welcome, thanks for several improvements received.
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> f. ExternalShape, ExternalGeometry?
>>>
>>> ExternalShape handled by Inline.
>>>
>>> [7.0] X3D4 9.4.2 Inline
>>>
>>> https://www.web3d.org/specifications/X3Dv4Draft/ISO-IEC19775-1v4-WD3/Part01/components/networking.html#Inline
>>>
>>> What about ExternalGeometry for glTF models, is it needed?  Not finding
>>> it in Mantis, wondering if there is no strong use case or maybe we've
>>> dropped a ball.
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> g. Event Utility node clarifications
>>>
>>> Thanks Andreas for remembering this long-overlooked issue.
>>>
>>> [8.0] [x3d-public] X3D4 draft nearing readiness for ballot; Mantis 519
>>> Event utilities, ignoring set_boolean false events
>>>
>>> https://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/2020-November/014185.html
>>>
>>> This applies to IntegerTrigger and TimeTrigger nodes, ignoring
>>> set_boolean FALSE improves logical understanding and simplifies event
>>> animation chains.
>>>
>>> Absent objections (none heard) will apply this straightforward change.
>>> No problems with prior compatibility identified as a result of this logical
>>> refinement.
>>>
>>> Review led Dick and I to also look at related issue
>>>
>>> [8.1] Mantis 1183, 30.4.6 IntegerTrigger - Ambiguous response when
>>> integerKey field is reset
>>>        https://www.web3d.org/member-only/mantis/view.php?id=1183
>>>
>>> > Suggested clarification to ensure consistent implementations and
>>> expectations: append
>>> > "Resetting the integerKey field generates a corresponding integerKey
>>> field output event."
>>>
>>> also related:
>>>
>>> [8.2] Mantis 1182: 30.4.3 BooleanToggle - Ambiguous response when toggle
>>> field is reset
>>>        https://www.web3d.org/member-only/mantis/view.php?id=1182
>>>
>>> > "Resetting the toggle field generates a corresponding toggle field
>>> output event."
>>>
>>> Absent objections, we plan to apply all of these related simple/sensible
>>> clarifications to X3D4 specification prose.
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> h. HTML guidelines
>>>
>>> Draft still pending.
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> i. Field name consistency
>>>
>>> The possibility of synonym names for inconsistently named X3D3 fields
>>> looks to provide an excellent opportunity to regularize X3D4 scene graph
>>> for new authors, HTML5 X3D models, etc. without unintended loss of
>>> backwards compatibility.
>>>
>>> [8.0] [x3d-public] X3D4 finalization endgame: Field naming
>>> reconciliation as synonyms
>>>
>>> https://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/2020-November/014125.html
>>>
>>> Agree with Andreas note that GeoLOD should not have a synonym field for
>>> children since accessType is different.  Others appear feasible.
>>>
>>> This does not appear to be everyone's first preference, but does appear
>>> to be feasible (i.e. "can live with it").
>>>
>>> Dick is preparing general prose regarding synonyms for section 4
>>> Concepts.
>>>
>>> Attached please find screenshot of how specification format for affected
>>> node interfaces might change.  We will update this draft during meeting to
>>> match preferred form.
>>>
>>> [8.2] X3D4 32.4.2 CADFace
>>>
>>> https://www.web3d.org/specifications/X3Dv4Draft/ISO-IEC19775-1v4-WD3/Part01/components/CADGeometry.html#CADFace
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> 2. Specification release timing.
>>>
>>> Group discussion.
>>>
>>> Additional items welcome.  Are any other finals steps needed to be ready
>>> to ship X3D4 for Web3D Consortium member ballot and Board of Directors
>>> approval?
>>>
>>>
>>> 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
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/20201204/75079b0d/attachment-0001.html>