I finally got around to write some comments on the requirements
document. I reversed the numbering, since the last bit is the most
controversial.
1.4.3. Authoring
There shall be a bidirectional mapping between X3D and Interreality
3D capabilities and semantics.
I assume this include
These are all really great ideas -- there's too much here to reply in
detail (I'd be up all night) but rest assured that I'll be incorporating
a lot of this into the requirements document. I'll post the new version
with everyone's suggestions in a few days.
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 11:18:03PM
Just a long brain-dump of some ideas I had while reading through the list of
the requirements for the VOS/Interreality 3D suite. I'm sure you will think
some are blatantly obvious, or redundant, or that some aren't quite within
the scope of VOS -- though perhaps they are something that could be
Am 26.01.2007 um 01:39 schrieb Braden McDaniel:
[...]
Why isn't this a job for a metadata spec? It seems to me that this
kind
of semantic information is too application-specific to encode in the
structure of the file format itself.
I could say as well, 3D appearance information is too
Am 24.01.2007 um 19:05 schrieb Peter Amstutz:
I agree. I have the book they published describing the COLLADA spec,
and intend to base the VOS 3D data models on COLLADA wherever it makes
sense, including physics parameters.
[...]
I guess I'll have to chime in at this point...
I only took a
Now this is weird. Somehow the mail archives for January are missing
messages, but only messages sent from me! I'm going to have to dig into
this. In the mean time, yes, I can re-post the requirements document
I'm working on.
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 10:26:25PM -0800, Ken Taylor wrote:
To: VOS Discussion
Subject: Re: [vos-d] VOS requirements
Am 24.01.2007 um 19:05 schrieb Peter Amstutz:
I agree. I have the book they published describing the COLLADA spec,
and intend to base the VOS 3D data models on COLLADA wherever it makes
sense, including physics parameters.
[...]
I
On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 11:04 +0100, Karsten Otto wrote:
Am 24.01.2007 um 19:05 schrieb Peter Amstutz:
I agree. I have the book they published describing the COLLADA spec,
and intend to base the VOS 3D data models on COLLADA wherever it makes
sense, including physics parameters.
[...]
Yea, that needs to be in there. See, that's why I wanted you guys to
look at it :-)
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 01:00:28PM +0100, Mats wrote:
What about physics?
Siterer Peter Amstutz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I've started writing up a requirements document for VOS.
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 08:59:34AM -0500, Reed Hedges wrote:
So this is really Interreality 3D requirements, not just VOS
requirements? Also, that means that non-3D applications are outside the
scope of this particular document?
Right, this is focusing on the 3D stuff. The point is to have
I'm less concerned about scaling down to old hardware platforms, since
there's a reason why that hardware was replaced to begin with. However,
scaling down to embedded and mobile devices is important. I think that
bandwidth requirements are probably the biggest restriction on what a
mobile
HW accelerated embedded and mobile devices with OpenGL ES can to a
certain extent do procedural textures and geometry which can cut
bandwith requirements a lot.
-Mats
Siterer Peter Amstutz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm less concerned about scaling down to old hardware platforms, since
there's a
I agree. I have the book they published describing the COLLADA spec,
and intend to base the VOS 3D data models on COLLADA wherever it makes
sense, including physics parameters.
On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 06:47:04PM +0100, Mats wrote:
Compatibility with COLLADA Physics might be an idea. It's
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 00:53:40 -0500, Peter Amstutz wrote:
It shall be possible to interoperate with chat systems such as
IRC and Jabber and give users on these other systems a
presence in the virtual world.
Take a look at this, I love it. It's once again validation for my idea to
On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 20:03:52 -0500, Reed Hedges wrote:
Lalo Martins wrote:
http://telepathy.freedesktop.org/wiki/System_Overview
Yeah there are a bunch of interesting proposals for application data
sharing over dbus. There was one for sharing a single presence status
code between
I've started writing up a requirements document for VOS. While we've
had unstructured TODO lists in the past with various ideas for
features, we've never sat down and tried to document exhaustively what
exactly it is that we want VOS todo. I think having it written down
will help us get on
16 matches
Mail list logo
