Reserring to them would be an issue for VRML 1.x or 2.0 I would assume.
Will there be a way to esser to DEF'd objects? I should hope so. Whether
or not they appear in the parse tree is probably implementation dependent.
Should they be written back out? I should think so.
>DEFONLY adds implementation complication, with absolutely no added
>customer-visible functionality. VRML customers-- the vast majority of people
>who will just browse the VRML worlds we create-- won't care whether a VRML
>file contains:
> DEFONLY Gold Material { ... }
> DEFONLY Silver Material { ... }
>or:
> Switch {
> DEF Gold Material { ... }
> DEF Silver Material { ... }
> }
>
>However, it is even better to just DEF Gold ... the first place it would be
>used; the VRML file will be smaller if you do it that way (and that's the way
>DEF/USE is meant to work).
VRML authors are customers too -- right now pretty much the only customer.
I think it would be better to accept that there are no authoring tools for
VRML that come even close to dealing well with DEF/USE, and make it more
usable in the code -- which is the place where you have to work to get
these supposed advantages.
In the aesas that I have to treat VRML as a programming language, I would
appreciate it if it acted like one.
James
James Waldrop / Technical Director
sulam@construct.net / Construct Internet Design
sulam@well.com / http://www.construct.net