On 23/11/06, J. Landman Gay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
jbv wrote:
> hence my innocent (really) question : what makes users with an
Enterprise
> license more qualified to discuss Rev improvements ?
It hasn't got much to do with qualifications, it's just an extra perk
for those who have an Enter
so far.
All the best!
Viktoras
---Original Message---
From: Richard Gaskin
Date: 11/24/2006 9:33:38 PM
To: How to use Revolution
Subject: Re: Where Rev could be going...
Bernard Devlin wrote:
> I want to continue this discussion a little further to see if my
> u
Richard,
thank you again for re-iterating those arguments. As I'm ambivalent
about the whole browser thing, I've just been playing devil's
advocate. As far as I can see, I won't ever bring this up again.
I'll leave it up to others if they want to further articulate the
case for a brows
I have no business talking on this thread at all as I have no technical
ability or understanding in this arena, but I have an application that I
would like to serve over the internet so I have been following this thread.
What about a "very thin client" that, when a link is clicked in a web page
th
Bernard Devlin wrote:
I want to continue this discussion a little further to see if my
understanding is correct: 1) any Rev app that would run in a browser
plug-in could only offer a sub-set of Rev functionality
Yes, browsers behaviors are a subset of all application behaviors.
On the deskt
Hello.
I've been reading the responses on this topic, and I can see great
things for both a browser extension of Revolution as well as a 3D
Version of Revolution. Briefly touching on the 3D Rev: If done
correctly (ie. relatively easy to use, interact with, etc) this has
the potential to p
Richard Gaskin said:
>>
One of the hardest things in making a browser plugin is dealing with the
limitations of the environment: no file I/O, no Apple events, no
Registry access, no windows, no window styles, etc. In a comprehensive
superset of HyperTalk like SuperTalk and Transcript, doing that
jbv wrote:
hence my innocent (really) question : what makes users with an Enterprise
license more qualified to discuss Rev improvements ?
It hasn't got much to do with qualifications, it's just an extra perk
for those who have an Enterprise license. In addition, Enterprise users
also get pre
Chipp,
> JBV,
>
> No one ever said being on the improve-list was a function of being
> "qualified." It's a forum where Enterprise users can discuss issues
> amongst themselves and at times also with Kevin and the programmers.
> To join it, the prerequisite is an Enterprise user license.
hence m
JBV,
No one ever said being on the improve-list was a function of being
"qualified." It's a forum where Enterprise users can discuss issues
amongst themselves and at times also with Kevin and the programmers.
To join it, the prerequisite is an Enterprise user license.
Frankly, IMHO, this list is
alte Brill
Date: 11/23/2006 2:21:19 PM
To: use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Subject: Re: Re: Where Rev could be going...3D?
Hi Viktoras,
You wrote:
> Well I made my purchase in February this
> year, and from advertiser of Arcade engine on the Revolution web
> site I
> und
On 23 Nov 2006, at 07:27, Viktoras Didziulis wrote:
Hey, hey
I provoked the 3D stuff not because to force someone starting
developing Rev
3D module from scratch...
The intention was to draw your attention to the fact that OpenGL 3D
engine
for the Revolution ALREADY EXISTS and sits on the
Hi Viktoras,
You wrote:
Well I made my purchase in February this
year, and from advertiser of Arcade engine on the Revolution web
site I
understood that 3D support is not a problem. But this was not the
whole
truth about 3D in Rev...
The arcadeEngine page clearly talks wireframe Object
Viktoras,
I might be wrong on this, but according to my experience, if you have
3 years to achieve your project, I would suggest considering writing your
own external to interface Rev with openGL...
Well, I haven't coded any external during the last couple of years and my
experience is based on
Message---
From: jbv
Date: 11/23/06 12:01:44
To: How to use Revolution
Subject: Re: Where Rev could be going...3D?
Viktoras,
> Hey, hey
>
> I provoked the 3D stuff not because to force someone starting developing
Rev
> 3D module from scratch...
> The intention w
Viktoras,
> Hey, hey
>
> I provoked the 3D stuff not because to force someone starting developing Rev
> 3D module from scratch...
> The intention was to draw your attention to the fact that OpenGL 3D engine
> for the Revolution ALREADY EXISTS and sits on the shell exposed by iGame3D
> with seemi
Hey, hey
I provoked the 3D stuff not because to force someone starting developing Rev
3D module from scratch...
The intention was to draw your attention to the fact that OpenGL 3D engine
for the Revolution ALREADY EXISTS and sits on the shell exposed by iGame3D
with seemingly no one being inter
There are probably a dozen different angles on improving the API,
however... my number one would be support for any sort of custom
object. It's nearly impossible to maintain anything inside of a Rev
window. Note that the guys at Altuit did a masterful job with
altBrowser, but that it still
Richard,
> jbv wrote:
> > too bad all the time spent ranting on this list about
> > Rev missing features can't be used to code those
> > features instead...
>
> What changes would be needed to the externals API?
please remember I was using the externals API available
for MC 2.4 in 2003... AFAIR
Mark,
> So why didn't you?
AFAIR I had a couple of emails exchange with someone at RR (might be Tuviah
but I'm not sure - I'd need to check my archives) about using openGL
for 2D vector graphics, but suddenly didn't get any answer to my questions
and suggestions...
please remember that it was i
jbv wrote:
too bad all the time spent ranting on this list about
Rev missing features can't be used to code those
features instead...
What changes would be needed to the externals API?
--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World Media Corporation
_
So why didn't you?
Chris and Chipp at altuit did with altBrowser, and it became part of
RunRevs 'Rev Select' programme, and is now going to be part of the
standard distribution - which suggests that RunRev are quite open to
non-RunRev enhancements of the product.
How worthwhile financiall
JBV-
Clearly there is some level of "open"-ness. If you check out Bill's post in
the forum he's done the development..he just needs someone to help with the
documenation/sample code and QA. The iGame3d api is huge and needs some
dedicated individual to provide some elbow grease to make it happe
Hi all,
>
> Is anything constructive going on between Revolution Ltd and iGame3D or just
> silence?..
>
once again, this kind of discussion is a blatant demonstration of the kind of
dead-end
the Rev community is "trapped" into (yes, I'm using these "strong" words on
purpose) : waiting endlessly
"Viktoras Didziulis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 22 november 2006 18:12:27 GMT+01:00
To: "How to use Revolution"
Subject: Re: Where Rev could be going...3D?
Reply-To: How to use Revolution
And fortunately for us here on this list, Google Earth is the
type of thing that'
For further info: http://www.igame3d.de/DeadDays/postmortem.html
On 22 Nov 2006, at 17:12, Viktoras Didziulis wrote:
And fortunately for us here on this list, Google Earth is the
type of thing that's easier for us to build.
Google Earth heavily relies on its 3D engine loading all the complex
On 18 Nov 2006, at 20:19, Dan Shafer wrote:
Each execution
of the
CGI is effectively blocking in nature. (I'm over-simplifying a bit
here, I
know, but I think this is the primary concern in broad terms.)
Dave Cragg wrote:
Dan, I don't think this is correct.
Each call to a Rev CGI on a
>And fortunately for us here on this list, Google Earth is the
>type of thing that's easier for us to build.
Google Earth heavily relies on its 3D engine loading all the complex
textures and objects on a sphere. I tried QT 3D capabilities (not virtual
reality moves, but the real 3D graphics lik
On 11/22/06 1:30 AM, "jbv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
SIDE NOTE
> I gave up with Flash as a development tool many years ago coz it's been
> one of the most frustating experiences... for instance, I never found how
> to define a global in ActionScript... but perhaps the most recent versions
> of F
Bernard-
Wednesday, November 22, 2006, 3:39:10 AM, you wrote:
> As I've said, it's not currently a high priority for me, but it seems
> to be quite important to other users. If we knew what the
> limitations were, then maybe we'd stop pestering Runrev for it :-)
It's doubtful. Yes, this seems
Bernard Devlin wrote:
... it's clear from the number of times that it has come up,
that there's quite a lot of desire for it
...
As I've said, it's not currently a high priority for me,
but it seems to be quite important to other users.
What people want is not always what they need. :)
<
Just to weigh in with an additional voice... I too am very interested in
this... Jim
on 11/22/06 7:39 AM, Bernard Devlin wrote:
>>>
> I know that every time this has come up, the people who
> actually write the Rev engine say a Rev plug-in would be difficult if
> not impossible to implement. Th
>>
I know that every time this has come up, the people who
actually write the Rev engine say a Rev plug-in would be difficult if
not impossible to implement. This includes engineers going back to the
original MetaCard product. I can't say for sure what the problems might
be, but the response has b
Hi list,
>
> If someone came up with a Flash project translator I would welcome it into
> the RevSelect program.
>
> Flash the product isnt always that great a designer experience for all
> purposes of Flash the format.
are you sure that any Rev stack can be fully translated into Flash format ?
I
Mikey said
>>
As far as a browser plugin goes, what are you suggesting? On its
face, wouldn't it be more "where-the-world-is-going" compliant to have
RR follow the lead of Morfik and natively build AJAX and/or Flash
apps?
<<
I suggested before that Ajax/Flash targets were a possibility for
del
As far as a browser plugin goes, what are you suggesting? On its
face, wouldn't it be more "where-the-world-is-going" compliant to have
RR follow the lead of Morfik and natively build AJAX and/or Flash
apps?
--
On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth
On the second day, God crea
Dave,
>
> Dan, I don't think this is correct.
>
> Each call to a Rev CGI on a server will start a new instance of the
> Rev engine. Many instances can be running at the same time, and
> whichever completes first will return first.
I confirm this. AFAIR this has been described several times ove
On 18 Nov 2006, at 20:19, Dan Shafer wrote:
However, the inability to thread in Rev effectively makes the use
of Rev for
CGI applications pretty limited as a practical matter. Each
execution of the
CGI is effectively blocking in nature. (I'm over-simplifying a bit
here, I
know, but I think
Dan,
>
> However, the inability to thread in Rev effectively makes the use of Rev for
> CGI applications pretty limited as a practical matter. Each execution of the
> CGI is effectively blocking in nature. (I'm over-simplifying a bit here, I
> know, but I think this is the primary concern in bro
Bernard,
Andre is much more knowledgeable and deeply experienced in this subject than
I, and I suspect he'll jump in here as well, but FWIW, here's my take.
It is perfectly possible to use Rev as a CGI platform. I have successfully
coded CGIs of moderate complexity on both Linux and OS X. Once y
In the light of the discussion about Rev plug-ins, I decided to re-
visit a post I made last year about where Rev was in relation to
competing technologies. At the end of it, I listed what I thought
Runrev should do to increase their competitive edge.
>>
These are the things I think Rev nee
41 matches
Mail list logo
