Re: LANG: Object Sharing

Jerry Isdale (
Tue, 14 Jun 94 17:26:47 PDT

>No it wouldn't. Listen, I'm repeating myself over and over. If we want a
>truly USABLE standard that is PLATFORM INDEPENDANT, we have to design for the
>lowest possible system. If we assume full internet access, cdrom, 24 bit
>colour, we are shutting out maybe half of the people who could be users. That
>is not a standard and it will fail, and then something that does work will
>become the standard.

Total device independence is an impossiblity here. You cannot expect a
person using a KSR33 to access a VRML system. Same goes for the glass
teletype equivilent. If the person doesnt have a 3d graphic renderer, then
they dont get the benefit of VRML. Oh ok, they can read the ascii version
of the world description. Ho Hum.

A CDROM is not required for the local object repository concept. A cdrom is
just a very nice distribution mechanism for it. A truck load of CDROMs
moving cross country has more bandwidth than a T3 link. The user would be
quite free to copy the objects to their local hard drive if they wish.

As for graphic systems, I have been using a Rend386 based renderer for a
year or so. It works ok and Joe Gradecki, et al have built some decent
modem based shared worlds on top of it. That level of rendering is a good
low end expectation. Heck, VREAM and WTK/Win are slower. Great 3D graphics
boards will be quite common place in two years. There are renderers
available for the Mac that can read Rend386 WLD files. Bernie Roehl's
latest renderer is pure C and fairly portable. That gets most people with
a SLIP/POP line. Workstation level systems could do even better.

The VRML/VRIF standard does not restrict the platform independence, much.
It does expect that you have some capability for floating point and convex,
planar polygon rendering. That much of an assumption you need.

Jerry Isdale
System Engineer
Illusion, Inc.
2660 Townsgate Rd., Suite 530
Westlake Village, CA 91361

Phone: (805) 371-4530 FAX: (805) 371-4533

Standards aren't