> Java3D isn't a High-Level-API: Okay, maybe it is what some people think > high-level is, but in detail it is no more than a wrapper for OpenGL, > touching the concept of scenegraphs. Most calls seem to be a 1:1 wrappers > for OpenGL .... and the more I got involved into native OpenGL the more the > parallels between Java3D and OpenGL showed up. What do I need this "high- > level" API for? The scenegraph-"capabilities" of Java3D are more debilating > than of any use. Most features are nearly 1:1 "calls" to OpenGL ..... Wow, we definitely see it from a different perspective. There are two main advantages for us, namely:
- that we can develop our code on any platform we wish and deploy it many environments, including our CAVE, without modification (using the ConfiguredUniverse utility). The abstraction of InputDevices, the inplementation of head-tracking, and many other details allows us to take external apps and make them VR apps very easily because the scene and the final display are uncoupled. Perhaps it's not that Java3D isn't high-level, but that for just showing a 3d object on a monitor you don't really access these capabilities. I'll bet you a lot of people develop code to use Java mouse events, instead of the provided Java3D InputDevice interface. - the standard scenegraph representation allows us to use behaviors we construct, such as dissection in virtual reality, on any kind of data we import. The Java3D makes it so we don't have to hack other people's code to be able to manipulate their scenes. Our behaviours get loaded into the other app through the ConfiguredUniverse. Once again, if you're only going to do one app, or don't expect to use external products, perhaps you don't need this modularity. So perhaps it's not that it's not high-level, but that for your applications it doesn't have enough benefits to make it worthwhile. <snip /> > What should happen to improve Java3D: > > -make Java3D open source so the community is able to improve or extend > Java3D At last year's SIGGRAPH, it was mentioned that Sun would like code contributions for the 1.4 API. But I'm sure it won't be open source. If what you mean is that the source code is available, yes that's the case I think, but you won't be able to start branding new versions of Java3D, as you could in OSS. All the Java APIs have the same Community Process to make them stable AND reflect user needs at each major revision. > -Sun should continue Java3D and release version 1.4 as soon as possible and > with the most wanted features I'd like that too. > -introduce a real high-level api, which supports VRML, 3D file loaders, > advanced intersection, NURBS and what else The intent of APIs thought is not to provide all the loaders, but to give access to the framework. Plus issues of updates for things frequently changing like xj3d would bog down the main API revision process. That being said, I'd love for someone to come up with NURBS loaders with LOD management :-) > -low-level access to OpenGL or DirectX Unfortunately, you're asking for the Impossible Program. One that has very high level functionality that should be portable and efficient, but allows the user to muck around with the implementation. It'd be nice, but it's not possible to any great extent. Another CDN$0.02, Paul P.S. On the other thread, good to know the source of the "holding pattern" stuff. Thanks. I'll remain optimistic that new graphics developments will be amenable to Java3D stuff. Why waste all that effort? =========================================================================== 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".
