Slashdot Mirror

If they could re-make VRML as a familiar XML-style language with some support for java and javascript

Sounds like X3D to me.

This ought to be tied in with H-Anim and X3d.

Otherwise, the will be re-inventing the wheel and conflicting with existing standards.

M

X3D, an XML extension of the venerable VRML file format, might serve your needs.

MPEG-4 is a format, DivX is a codec.

Is this an open standard?

MPEG-4 is, yes. The standards docment can be found here.

Does this mean that file that is MPG4 playable on something that supports MPG4 or do you still need access to a proprietary codec?

You need a codec, I don't know if there are any non-proprietary ones, there may be.

I have kind of a love/hate relationship with VRML - you can do some pretty incredible stuff with it, but the syntax is archane, and scripting support varies widly between browsers.

A little known feature of VRML97 is the inclusion of the EAI (External Authoring Interface), which lets you tie in Java objects (or C++, in some browsers), and use the objects to dynamically affect the environment. Some projects actually only have a really simple stub .wrl file, and then build the rest of the stuff from a database on the back end, bypassing the syntax difficulties.

Unfortunatly, the main reason that EAI hasn't revolutionized VRML and made it widely used is that not all browsers support it, and levels of compliance varies between the ones that do. Sound familiar (HTML, Java Applets, etc...)?

The next revision of VRML shows a lot of promise -it's an XML-based language called X3D (Yeah, I know, another damn X* acronym). Hopefully, by eliminating the need for specialized parsers, the browser writers will be able to concentrate more on spec compliance, rendering speed/quality, and cross-platform availability.

Right now, the best VRML97 browsers are Cosmo Player and ParallelGraphic's Cortona, but neither have Linux versions available (old versions of Cosmo are available for SGI). The spec for VRML97 and X3D are availble, and are surpisingly readable.


Scott Severtson
Applications Developer

Open Inventor, as the FAQs will tell you, is a 3d format designed to work with OpenGL.

Mark Pesce used Inventor as a starting point for VRML-1 around 1995. VRML-1 was the first real attempt to create a standard 3d file format that would work over the web. It has seen limited success as a standard of exchange betweed CAD programs.

A second version of VRML based loosely on VRML-1 (but not backward compatable with it) was proposed by one of the major industry players and rapidly became an ISO standard in 1997. By many arguments, it failed as a standard because the required plugin is not installed by default. There are other reasons too, but by and large, mention of VRML still gets a "huh?" even from some fairly computer savvy people.

The next version of VRML being developed by the Web3D Consortium is based on XML. The tags are designed such that conversion from VRML97 to X3D is quite straightforward. If X3D is built into IE and Mozilla, we could finally see the standard VR format gaining acceptance.

As for all the Open Source software flying around in the 3d community now, it tends to make things less exciting from a money point of view. OTOH, I'm sure the same web designers who like to make bandwidth hogging flash sites are getting very excited now.

I am obviously biased in certain areas. Other, less biased histories can be found at: http://hiwaay.net/~crispen/vrml/history.html

MPEG-4 Can be used for 3D content. The Web 3D consortium is currently working on the project. I assume this is what they were comparing to.

What are the potential barriers towards adopting such a technology - better connection with kinesthetics, the intuitive match between spatial awareness and body motion - between physics models like MathsEngine to express - some killerapp vertically integrated applications to reach selected markets (like telesurgery which requires precise placement) to help bring the price-point down - software/content that supports 2-3D with the marginal effort of adding 3D smaller than marginal increase in sales

Apart from the gee-whiz factor, a realistic look at what services would benefit most from such displays needs to be addressed, especially their willingness to cough up the money. Remember that hardware is only 10% of the total costs, ad another 20% for peripherals/support, 30% for software/operational consumables, and 40% for training. It's starting to looking expensive.

3D will have a role but I suspect widespread star wars type holographic displays are still a way off unless a miracle occurs.

LL

Your coverage of banned places is too large. The places banned are the ones on the US export control list. The Blaxxun folks are just covering their tails with this sort of language. The reality is that the source is out there. How well does this restriction work for PGP? Here is the text of that part:

2.3 U.S. Export Restrictions. Web3D acknowledges that the Code and all related technical information, documents and materials are subject to export controls under the U.S. Export Administration Regulations. In connection with its rights hereunder, Web3D will: (a) comply strictly with all legal requirements established under these controls; (b) cooperate fully with blaxxun in any official or unofficial audit or inspection that relates to these controls; and (c) not export, re-export, divert or transfer, directly or indirectly, any such item or direct products thereof to Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Sudan, Syria or any national thereof or to any country or national thereof that is embargoed by Executive Order, unless Web3D has obtained the prior written authorization of blaxxun and the U.S. Commerce Department. Upon notice to Web3D, blaxxun may modify this list to conform to changes in the U.S. Export Administration Regulations.

-Alan Hudson
Chair Source Code Management Task Group
www.web3d.org/TaskGroups/source

It's yet another "Community Source" license. Lots of interesting little twists, though, including a ban on using the source code outside the USA, Eurpoean Union, Australia, and Japan. The rest of the world is SOL. There's an especially amusing addendum to the license that makes the Web3d consortium thought police for Blaxxun. Check out:
EUA, Web3d/Blaxxun Agreement, Amusing addendum

It's yet another "Community Source" license. Lots of interesting little twists, though, including a ban on using the source code outside the USA, Eurpoean Union, Australia, and Japan. The rest of the world is SOL. There's an especially amusing addendum to the license that makes the Web3d consortium thought police for Blaxxun. Check out:
EUA, Web3d/Blaxxun Agreement, Amusing addendum

It's yet another "Community Source" license. Lots of interesting little twists, though, including a ban on using the source code outside the USA, Eurpoean Union, Australia, and Japan. The rest of the world is SOL. There's an especially amusing addendum to the license that makes the Web3d consortium thought police for Blaxxun. Check out:
EUA, Web3d/Blaxxun Agreement, Amusing addendum

Is there any particular advantage to making PNG an ISO/IEC standard? These standards are sold for profit, and so the standard will not be freely available if it goes ISO/IEC. So, why do it?

The PNG spec, like the VRML 2.0 spec before it, will remain freely available. The ISO will have the right to sell the version with their boilerplate and logo, but the technical content will be identical, and there will be no restrictions on the distribution of the W3C and PNG Development Group versions.

As for benefits: believe it or not, there are companies (and especially governments) that require the use of an international standard wherever possible. In the case of the US, it is often the case that companies wishing to do business under government contract must support the relevant standards in their products--and to the extent that this support is not seen as a complete waste of time and code, it generally ends up in the versions of the product that you buy, too.

ISO/IEC standardization is also seen as somehow better/safer than standardization promulgated by Internet upstarts like the W3C, IETF or PDG. Again, that may result in more and/or better support in your favorite products.

Of course, these things take time, and it looks like there will be another FCD and four-month voting period before PNG even makes it to the Draft International Standard stage, which itself lasts a good number of months. So it's pretty safe to say that there are no immediate advantages to all of this.

By the way, it's conceivable (though not definite) that zlib/deflate will be next. :-)