Re: Scripts vs APIs

Kevin Goldsmith (
Mon, 5 Sep 1994 23:11:33 -0700 (PDT)

> I think that VRML should basically be a description language, and there
> should be some sort of standard API for dealing with some of the things that
> are not completely handled by the description language.

I think the issues are getting confused. I don't think that
there is a half and half approach. VRML is a description language.
There could be an API which would aid you in creating / editing and
dealing with that language, but there shouldn't be anything you could do
in the API that you couldn't do in the language. Look at Inventor or
OOGL for an example of what I am talking about. The inventor file format
encapsulates 3D and some interaction. The Inventor libraries let you do
operations on the scene described by the file format. You can create an
Inventor scene by entering in the file format directly or via the API.

> I think that the name VRML is a trifle misleading. VRML is likely to
> be used as much like a MOO/MUD/MUSH as a like a WWW HTML document.
> Most HTML documents simply present information, and VRML probably will be used
> for a wider variety of things. Because of this I think that a scene
> description language is not enough.

I think we are getting beyond the scope of VRML again. Reread
the charter of what VRML is supposed to accomplish. I think a MOO/MUD
scritping language could be built on top of VRML later.. If we keep
adding things onto what VRML is supposed to do, we'll never actually
create it.