It's potentially interesting, although the details seem a bit thin at
the moment -- there doesn't seem to be any obvious documentation on its
architechture. It's also non-free software (in the GNU/FSF sense) which
is a drag.
On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 08:53:19PM -0700, HEBLACK, J wrote:
I think what you're getting at is that we should take a broader view of
what VOS could be -- and I agree. The potential influence of VOS is
similar in scope to that of the world wide web, and I'd like to make
sure we get it right.
However, I'd also like to submit that interoperability is a
On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 09:57 -0400, Peter Amstutz wrote:
It's potentially interesting, although the details seem a bit thin at
the moment -- there doesn't seem to be any obvious documentation on its
architechture. It's also non-free software (in the GNU/FSF sense) which
is a drag.
Well
The Inquirer article mentions the GPL but I can't find any indication of
licensing terms on Sun's own Project Darkstar page, except for the SDK
download which appears to be a very restrictive non-commercial
license. They say open source right on the first page, but I can't
find any indication
My basic complaint with X3D was that the transition to XML could have
been an opportunity to clean up a lot of the syntactical warts of VRML
(delimiting index face sets with -1, for example) while still keeping
the basic data model. We could have had a schema that follows the best
practices
Ah, you're right. So they are *going* to make it open source, but arn't
quite there yet. But it's good to hear.
It looks like Darkstar is mainly (exclusively?) a server-side
technology, so it doesn't go quite as far up the application stack as
VOS is targeting. In other words, it doesn't
I agree 150% because I begged for that clean up. The unfortunate reality
was the people designing the Schema weren't that experienced with Schema
design OR XML and they did some ill-conceived things. Schema was very new
when they started (else RELAX would have been a better choice but it didn't
Peter Amstutz wrote:
On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 06:15:39PM -0400, Reed Hedges wrote:
The reason I ask is that I want to load some 3D objects from a COD file,
but then insert some non-3d children into one of those objects, and
extend its types. This is the kind of thing that VOS is all about :)
Peter Amstutz wrote:
Well, the idea was more to support the ability to import other file
formats (X3D comes to mind, although it's maybe not a good example since
it's really an example of how not to design an XML schema) using a
straightforward XSLT transform. Of course, we haven't yet
Len Bullard wrote:
I will move on to X3D because eventually I will need some
of the new features like Inlines with interfaces and bits like the Keyboard
Sensor, the upcoming Network Sensor and the physics engine, or the
Nice-to-Haves like the Boolean Sequencer that I can replicate in script
V-Realm Builder was and still is excellent. I won a copy in a contest over
a decade ago and that was my entry point. I still use it because it is all
VRML and has a great terrain editor and index face set utility, and easy
treeview interface, great support for sequencing and routing, etc. Big
Reed Hedges wrote:
Len Bullard wrote:
I will move on to X3D because eventually I will need some
of the new features like Inlines with interfaces and bits like the Keyboard
Sensor, the upcoming Network Sensor and the physics engine, or the
Nice-to-Haves like the Boolean Sequencer that I can
Reed Hedges wrote:
For one thing, apparently you can't do this:
class Base {
public:
virtual void pure() = 0;
templateclass T register() {
VobjectBase::registerHandlerT(message, handler);
}
void handler(Message *m) {
...
}
};
class VirtualDerived : public virtual
In libs/vos/metaobjects/a3dl/sector.cc:
void Sector::setCollisionDetection(bool enabled)
{
Property::setProperty(*this, a3dl:colision-detection, enabled);
}
bool Sector::getCollisionDetection()
{
bool b;
Property::getProperty(*this, a3dl:colision-detection, b);
return b;
}
Good idea. This is what distributed version control is good for. While
you're at it, you can fix that synqueue.cc bug you pointed out, because
I haven't gotten around to it ;-)
On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 08:38:58PM -0700, Ken Taylor wrote:
In libs/vos/metaobjects/a3dl/sector.cc:
void
Should I post patches to the discussion list or send them directly to you?
-Ken
Peter Amstutz wrote:
Good idea. This is what distributed version control is good for. While
you're at it, you can fix that synqueue.cc bug you pointed out, because
I haven't gotten around to it ;-)
On Fri,
You can send it to me and Reed. Or, alternately, you can publish your
branch somewhere and I can merge it.
On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 08:59:58PM -0700, Ken Taylor wrote:
Should I post patches to the discussion list or send them directly to you?
-Ken
Peter Amstutz wrote:
Good idea. This
17 matches
Mail list logo
