----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2001 6:34
PM
Subject: [JAVA3D] JSR-134 Comments
(Physics!)
(I've posted this to both JSR-134 comments and
Java3D list because I thought it would be relevant to both. This is for
the Java Game Profile - http://jcp.org/jsr/detail/134.jsp)
If Java had a standard Physics API, that would be
simply AWESOME! The company I used to work for did Physics in Java, and
I can tell you this is something that would make Java very attractive for
games development. More and more, games are integrating Physics to make
them richer and more dynamic, and a standard Java Physics API should be a
vital part of the Java Game Profile.
I would implement it like JDBC...have different
versions (i.e. JDBC 1.0, 2.0, etc.) all defined with interfaces. Then
alternate implementations could be provided. For example, a basic
physics engine should be provided that is all Java, free/open source, but
commercial implementations could also be available that have more
functionality (i.e. basic engine implements Physics API 1.0, commerecial
implementation could implement Physics API 2.0). For development of
commerecial games, the commerecial Physics implementations should have some
kind of re-distribution agreement so that when a game is developed, the
Physics implementation can be legally included in the game.
Other things to consider is if the Physics API
should be in the javax.games.physics or just javax.physics, since many of the
physics api's might also be used for non-game purposes.
Couple of final notes:
1) I would rename javax.games to javax.game to be
more consistent with Java API naming.
2) Why is the specification targeting J2ME first
and foremost? Do cell phones really have enough computing power to do
3D/Physics? I would put more emphasis on J2SE/Java3D.
Anyway, this Games Profile seems cool and I wish
everyone the best of luck in making it a reality.
Michael P. McCutcheon
