Hi By making this kind of binding, you defeat the purpose of having Java3D in the first place. One of the main ideas behind Java3D is that it is portable across many different platforms, using native libraries on each system. Using OpenSceneGraph, you limit yourself to PC platforms. If this is what you are interested in, why not write your program in C++? there is no advantage to making a Java binding to OpenSceneGraph.
Just my $.02 -Bob Dengle >From: Mario Juric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Discussion list for Java 3D API <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [JAVA3D] Open Scene Graph vs. Java3D >Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 16:57:03 +0100 > >RE: [JAVA3D] Open Scene Graph vs. Java3DPierce, Gregory (TBS) wrote: > > Would one really want to do a Java Binding of the API or just port the >API to Java? Competition is good for business > >Question: The implementation of Java3D interfaces are bound to native code >via JNI. What would be the difference in making Java bindings to native >Open Scene Graph code? > >Competition is good, but there is probably enough competition from a myriad >of graphics engines. Maybe it would be better to combine the Open Scene >Graph open source efforts with those of J3D to get a more powerfull drive >behind it, especially after Sun has scaled down. > >--- >Mario Juric, M.Sc. CS, MUSTER Product Manager >IFAD, Forskerparken 10, DK - 5230 Odense M >Phone: +45 63 15 71 31 Fax: +45 65 93 29 99 >www: www.ifad.dk e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >--- > _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com =========================================================================== To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "signoff JAVA3D-INTEREST". For general help, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
