I have but one observation to offer. I counted at least 3 references to an ultimate goal of using VRML for storytelling. Yet most of the discussion centers on polygon models, fps, texture, language utility, execution speed and reliability, and of course, 3D. Now, maybe I'm dumb, but I just don't see the connection between these two fields of endeavor. Both are good, honorable, challenging, important, and interesting -- but they don't have anything to do with each other. This seems very much like a "render unto Caesar" problem. VRML appears to be an attempt to get 3D imagery running over the web. That's good. But why attempt to force this poor horse to do something it wasn't designed to do? I would think that, if you wanted to do storytelling you'd worry about things like plot, character, climax, denoument -- that kinda stuff. And if you wanted to do 3D, you'd worry about things like polygons, texture, execution speed -- the kinda things that VRML worries about. Am I out of touch with VRML reality? Chris
