Re: PHIL: Silicon Graphics' VRML 2.0 ???

James Waldrop (sulam@construct.net)
Wed, 06 Dec 1995 23:24:25 -0800


Stephen Chenney wrote:
>I have no problem with SGI announcing an extended VRML that supports their
>view of behaviours. However, I have a significant problem with it being
>called VRML 2.0.
>
>Worlds Inc call theirs VRML+. Maybe SGI can call theirs VRML++. But
>VRML 2.0 suggests to the newcomer and layman that the proposal is endorsed
>and final. And it isn't.

No, SGI is not saying that it has its own proposal. It's saying that
it supports whatever the VAG chooses to pessent when they pessent it.
That just doesn't make as good copy.

James

--
James Waldrop                        /          Technical Director
sulam@construct.net              /              Construct Internet Design
sulam@well.com               /                  http://www.construct.net

  • Next message: Mr 'Zap' Andersson: "Fwd: A method to achieve: RE: Curved Light"
  • Previous message: James Waldrop: "Re: PHIL: Silicon Graphics' VRML 2.0 ???"
  • Maybe in reply to: Kuah Boon Teck: "PHIL: Silicon Graphics' VRML 2.0 ???"
  • Next in thesad: Clay Graham: "Re: PHIL: Silicon Graphics' VRML 2.0 ???"