Was fooling around with 0.23 again to test whether some strange behavior I
was seeing was my fault or not (it wasn't -- basically, if objects move
around while my client is in the "download" phase, but stop moving before
it's complete, the client might get an out-of-date position update on them
and not get any update for their most recent position until they move again.
Same goes for orientation, etc) -- but that's not the point of this email.

The point is I've noticed that in 0.23 the blacksun pyramid seems a lot ...
smaller than in 0.24. Or maybe the penguins are bigger. Also, if I have 0.23
and 0.24 clients connected to the same server, the 0.23 guys look like
they're floating above the ground to the 0.24 guys while the 0.24 guys look
like they're half way in the ground to the 0.23 guys.

Obviously some scaling and origin placement has been tweaked between
versions. I just wanted to make sure this was intentional :) -- and also
suggest that re-scaling 3d data should be added as a cleanup task before
releasing 0.24. (Speaking of which, is a goal/to-do/priority list for 0.24
coalescing anywhere?)

Also it made me think about standardization. Obviously, VOS/Interreality3D
will eventually have to have a golden standard for networking and data
encoding. But also obviously, there will be lots of tweaking until a good
standard is found (given VOS's code-evaluate-recode development approach).
Until that standard is finalized, everyone will have to make sure they're
using the same version of clients, servers, and data sets, to ensure
consistency. But at some point, perhaps VOS/Interreality 1.0, a standard
needs to be set in stone, with a guarantee that objects will be interpreted
in consistent ways, that newer versions will be backwards-compatible, and
older versions will fail gracefully if presented with newer data. A standard
that's unambiguous enough that a person who's never seen the VOS codebase
could write their own client and server from the standard itself, and also
guarantee that compatibility.

But VOS 1.0 is probably quite a ways off :)

-Ken


_______________________________________________
vos-d mailing list
vos-d@interreality.org
http://www.interreality.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vos-d

Reply via email to