On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 07:39:44PM -0400, Reed Hedges wrote: > > So, it sounds to me like you want to append file A and file B to produce > > file C, and that some of those pieces in file B are intended to modify > > pieces of file A. I see why you might want to do that. > > Sort of. Here's an example of what I was thinking of: > > <load file="3dworld.cod/xod/whatever" /> > <vobject parent="/obj-from-file" type="ex:extra"> > ... > </vobject> > > <extend ref="/obj-from-file" type="ex:weird-type" />
Oh, I see. I think we've been arguing at cross purposes, because in
fact the <load> tag in XOD already has a few commands special to it that
do most of what you want:
<load file="3dworld.cod">
<!-- change site name of an object in the file -->
<rename from="objectA" to="objectB" />
<!-- add fileref as a child to current parent -->
<link name="foo" fileref="objectC" />
<!-- add a link to "objectD" going to "mine"
<linkout fileref="objectD" name="bar" child="mine" />
<!-- add a link from "mine" to "objectE" -->
<linkin parent="mine" name="baz" fileref="objectE" />
</load>
If we added an <addtype> command, which would be quite easy, then that
should do what you want.
I should mention that in this case it makes sense to store it as a
series of commands because they do in fact represent a set of edits that
are made at run time to an existing external structure. We're not
declaring a new vobject structure from scratch in this case.
> > Well, I feel like it should be more purely declarative and reflected by
> > the DOM structure, and not require that you have to in effect execute a
> > stream of commands 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 in a specific order scattered around
> > the file to reconstruct the vobject structure.
>
> This being what COD is, sort of, right?
Parts of it, yes. The parts I'm less happy about.
> Anyway, eventually when we have OTDs we could use those OTDs to generate
> DTDs or Schemas and be able to say
>
> <a3dl:sector name="world">
> <a3dl:object3d_sphere name="foo">
> <property name="a3dl:position">0 0 0</property>
> <a3dl:material name="a3dl:material">
> ...
> </a3dl:material>
> </a3dl:object3D_sphere>
> </a3dl:sector>
Yes! Exactly! That would enable people to use VOS to create and use
domain-specific languages very easily.
> Which would really be using XML to the fullest. Except for when you
> want a Vobject to have two types, then we need some other way to do
> that, like
> <multitype-vobject name="foo">
> <a3dl:object3d_sphere>
> ...object3d-related children...
> </a3dl:object3d_sphere>
> <misc:metadata>
> ... metadata ...
> </misc:metadata>
> </multitype-vobject>
>
> or some other way of using seperate XML elements for different types.
I hadn't really thought about it, but that seems like it would be a
reasonable way to do it.
--
[ Peter Amstutz ][ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ][ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
[Lead Programmer][Interreality Project][Virtual Reality for the Internet]
[ VOS: Next Generation Internet Communication][ http://interreality.org ]
[ http://interreality.org/~tetron ][ pgpkey: pgpkeys.mit.edu 18C21DF7 ]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ vos-d mailing list vos-d@interreality.org http://www.interreality.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vos-d
