[x3d-public] X3D meeting minutes 8 APR 2022: C/C++/C#, binding events under inactive branches of Switch or LOD

Tue Apr 12 05:28:38 PDT 2022

PointProperties >
SFInt32 markerType  0
could be changed to
SFNode splatGeometry NULL
when NULL a 2D square would be used as default
Otherwise a 2D geometry node could be used.
And a new node
Marker2D : Geometry2D
MFInt32 parts []
SFInt32 standard -1
If standard is set, it refers to the Okta table
if parts are used, it's a list of parts of markers which can be combined to
make a complex marker:
0 circle (line)
1 X
2 +
3 --
4 |
5 /
6 \
7 circle fill quadrant 1
8 circle fill quadrant 2
9 circle fill quadrant 3
10 circle fill quadrant 4
11 5 prong star
...
The marker geometry can optionally be compiled to a splat-friendly texture
by the PointProperties, or used as triangles with uv, for any color or
textures set in Appearance.

On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 11:25 AM GPU Group <gpugroup at gmail.com> wrote:

> PointProperties.markerType
> In theory the markerType symbols/patterns could be done with either
> a)  2D mesh/triangles/geometry with texture coords for each vertex OR
> b) splat/sprite texture on simple 2-triangle rectangle
> For a) 2D mesh approach, any Appearance.ImageTexture would be applied as
> texture on the geometry
> -- if that is the default interpretation/benchmark, and a browser wants to
> implement as b) splat, then a similar effect would need to be achieved when
> combining appearance texture with splat texture.
> -Doug
>
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2022 at 10:55 AM Brutzman, Donald (Don) (CIV) <
> brutzman at nps.edu> wrote:
>
>> Attendees: Anita Havele, Nicholas Polys, Dick Puk, Doug Sanden, Don
>> Brutzman.
>>
>>
>>
>> We successfully held our regular weekly X3D meeting today, 08-0900
>> pacific.  Agenda topics follow.
>>
>>
>>
>>    -
>>    https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81634670698?pwd=a1VPeU5tN01rc21Oa3hScUlHK0Rxdz09
>>    - https://zoom.us/j/148206572  Password 483805
>>    - https://www.web3d.org/member/teleconference-information
>>
>>
>>
>>    1. New weekly agenda item:  review ballot items from INCITS H3 (U.S.
>>    Standards Body) and W3C.
>>
>>
>>
>> We reviewed procedures and voted on two ballots for US. National Body.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>    1. Web3D 2022 Conference preparations are progressing well.  Call for
>>    Papers is now approved and available!
>>
>>
>>
>>    - http://web3d.siggraph.org
>>    - https://web3d.siggraph.org/web3d-2022-call-for-papers
>>
>>
>>
>> Web3D 2022:  27th International Conference on 3D Web Technology will be
>> November 2-4.  Dates of interest:
>>
>>
>>
>> Submission July 23rd, 2022
>>
>>                               Papers
>>
>>                               Tutorials
>>
>>                               Workshops
>>
>> Notification Sept. 15th, 2022
>>
>> Final version  01/10/2022
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>    1. X3D Scene Access Interface (SAI) draft specifications for C, C++,
>>    C# language bindings available for comment.
>>
>>
>>
>>    - [x3d-public] X3D C/C++/C# CD texts approval for ISO submission -
>>    public comments requested
>>    -
>>    https://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/2022-April/017073.html
>>    -
>>    https://www.web3d.org/specifications/ISO-IEC19777/ISO-IEC19777-3v3.3-CD
>>    C
>>    -
>>    https://www.web3d.org/specifications/ISO-IEC19777/ISO-IEC19777-4v3.3-CD
>>    C++
>>    -
>>    https://www.web3d.org/specifications/ISO-IEC19777/ISO-IEC19777-5v3.3-CD
>>    C#
>>
>>
>>
>> Our plan is to proceed with international review of version 3.3 of these
>> specifications, then upgrade to 4.0 once X3D4 Architecture is complete and
>> then X3D4 SAI 19775-2 abstract specification is similarly updated.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>    1. Our current top priority is resolving Mantis review issues, in
>>    order to finalize X3D4 Architecture for Draft International Standard
>>    submission to ISO.
>>
>>
>>
>>    -
>>    https://www.web3d.org/specifications/X3Dv4Draft/ISO-IEC19775-1v4-CD1/Part01/Architecture.html
>>
>>
>>
>>    1. PointProperties markerType: does it look OK?
>>
>>
>>
>>    - [x3d-public] X3D minutes, Friday 1 APR 2022: glTF X3D4 video,
>>    mantis issues, PointProperties markerType
>>    -
>>    https://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/2022-April/017049.html
>>
>>
>>
>>    - X3D4 Architecture, Shape component, 12.4.7 PointProperties
>>    -
>>    https://www.web3d.org/specifications/X3Dv4Draft/ISO-IEC19775-1v4-CD1/Part01/components/shape.html#PointProperties
>>
>>
>>
>> We had insightful discussion, the following was added to Mantis.
>>
>>
>>
>>    - Mantis 1393: 12.4.7 PointProperties missing markerType field
>>    - https://www.web3d.org/member-only/mantis/view.php?id=1393
>>
>>
>>
>> Where is point sprite (or point splat) proposal?
>>
>> Is this aligned satisfactorily/sufficiently with common practices for
>> point visualization? Seems compatible with other symbology.
>>
>> Can we
>> - control transparency? (background fully transparent, no control
>> provided)
>> - control color? (yes, by Material or Color node with indices/order)
>> - specify other images/icons/glyphs/sprite? (yes, but requires
>> coordination)
>>
>> If accepted, needs mention in 11.4.12 PointSet
>>
>> If accepted, needs integration with prior/existing work (including X3DOM
>> implementation)
>>
>> If not accepted, needs to be deferred to X3D4.1
>>
>> Proposing additional markerTypes to ISO corresponding to these other
>> approaches is a useful option to us.
>>
>> Goal: resolve during April 2022.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>    1. Mantis 1192: 07.2.2 Bindable children nodes - Undefined results if
>>       bindable node is under Switch or LOD is problematic
>>
>> https://www.web3d.org/member-only/mantis/view.php?id=1192
>>
>> Spec sayeth:
>> "The results are undefined if a bindable node is bound and is the child
>> of an LOD, Switch, or any node or prototype that disables its children."
>>
>> This leads to all manner of inconsistent problems among scenes. It also
>> means that Inline node (which may or may not include bindable nodes) has
>> undefined behavior under LOD/Switch/etc.
>>
>> As a result, in addition to indeterminate X3D browser behavior, it means
>> that X3D scenes are not fully composable. That is contrary to X3D design
>> objectives.
>>
>> Different prose and deterministic guidelines is needed in this section
>> that provides clear rules for binding/unbinding nodes when they become
>> active within LOD/Switch/etc. Small adaptations to current binding rules
>> can likely address this problem satisfactorily.
>>
>> Request review and comment on the following suggested resolution.  The
>> intent is to reinforce author modeling choices over independent browser
>> optimization.
>>
>>     “Sending a set_bind event to a bindable node that is a child of a
>> Switch node is typically ignored, respecting the selection logic of the
>> parent Switch.
>>
>>     Since different levels of an LOD node are intended to be visually
>> similar and only varying in terms of level of detail, sending a set_bind
>> event to a bindable node that is a child of an LOD typically binds that
>> node and also activates the corresponding level in the LOD.
>>
>>     Even if event behavior is ignored, such occurrences may be reported
>> via a console (if available).”
>>
>>
>>
>> Group review comments, added to Mantis 1192:
>>
>>    - For Switch, avoid “typically” and make phrasing unambiguous that
>>    the autoselection occurs.
>>    - For bindable nodes, note that they remain active on their
>>    respective binding stack.
>>    - If you have a bound Viewpoint under a selected Switch child, and a
>>    different Switch child becomes selected, is that current Viewpoint
>>    unbound?  We would expect so…
>>
>>
>> If this is too complex, we should defer to X3D4.1. This nevertheless is a
>> reduction of the “browser response is undefined” space. Let's get this
>> potential refinement sorted out as best possible, then assess if resolves
>> the issue satisfactorily, and then approve or else defer to 4.1.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Nicholas noted prior work on “Plans for Merging X3D AR Proposals”
>> proposal, we added this to Mantis as deferred work for X3D4.1 specification.
>>
>>
>>
>>    -
>>    https://www.web3d.org/wiki/index.php/Plans_for_Merging_X3D_AR_Proposals
>>    - https://www.web3d.org/member-only/mantis/view.php?id=1394
>>
>>
>>
>> Have fun with X3D!  8)
>>
>>
>>
>> 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 https://
>> 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/20220412/05a7258b/attachment-0001.html>