Re: On the VRML 1.0 spec, and VRML in general

Mark Waks (
Tue, 6 Dec 94 19:36:49 EST

>I'm not at all sure exactly why a person would be specifying cameras in a
>VRML scene. Since these things are supposed to be interactive, etc, it
>wouldn't seem like a plus to have everyone looking at a scene from the
>same predetermined spot. They would really only be useful in a future
>version which allowed interaction with a server to allow a dynamically
>changing camera description.

Well, I can think of one possible reason: to provide a *starting* point
for exploring the scene. That is, the camera may shift, but it needs to
start somewhere, and the camera command could be used to provide that.
(Maybe this is what you're thinking of in your last sentence, but I
don't see what the server has to do with it.)

Of course, in the long run it's probably an inadequate mechanism. Odds
are that we'll find that we need multiple, named "entrances" to a room,
so that other rooms can link to it in a robust topology. I still think
we're going to wind up needing some concept of "entrances" and "exits"
to rooms, which will need to be considerably more sophisticated than
just cameras. But this is a start...

-- Justin

Random Quote du Jour:

Sexism is sexism.
Racism is racism.
"Sexual orientation phobia" is "sexual orientation phobia."
War is not peace.
Ketchup is *not* a vegetable.
-- Evelyn C. Leeper