IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: draft-nelson-model-mail-ext-00.txt

nelson18@llnl.gov Thu, 26 October 1995 20:29 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa23403; 26 Oct 95 16:29 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa23399; 26 Oct 95 16:29 EDT
Received: from list.cren.net by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa17401; 26 Oct 95 16:29 EDT
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by list.cren.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA04867; Thu, 26 Oct 1995 16:00:25 -0400
Received: from dimacs.rutgers.edu (root@dimacs.rutgers.edu [128.6.75.16]) by list.cren.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA04808 for <ietf-822@list.cren.net>; Thu, 26 Oct 1995 15:59:40 -0400
Received: from lll-winken.llnl.gov (lll-winken.llnl.gov [128.115.14.1]) by dimacs.rutgers.edu (8.6.12+bestmx+oldruq+newsunq+grosshack/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA11711 for <ietf-822@Dimacs.Rutgers.EDU>; Thu, 26 Oct 1995 15:59:35 -0400
Received: from canopus.llnl.gov by lll-winken.llnl.gov (8.6.12/LLNL-1.18) via ESMTP; id MAA11222; Thu, 26 Oct 1995 12:56:40 -0700 for
Received: by canopus.llnl.gov (950413.SGI.8.6.12/950213.SGI.AUTOCF) id MAA26841; Thu, 26 Oct 1995 12:57:22 -0700
Message-Id: <9510261257.ZM26839@canopus.llnl.gov>
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 1995 12:57:22 -0700
Reply-To: nelson18@llnl.gov
X-Orig-Sender: owner-ietf-822@list.cren.net
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: nelson18@llnl.gov
To: Mark Crispin <MRC@cac.washington.edu>
Cc: ietf-822@dimacs.rutgers.edu, parks@eeel.nist.gov, mitra@worlds.net, moore@cs.utk.edu
Subject: Re: draft-nelson-model-mail-ext-00.txt
In-Reply-To: Mark Crispin <MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU> "Re: draft-nelson-model-mail-ext-00.txt" (Oct 25, 8:53pm)
References: <MailManager.814679625.6516.mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95)
X-Listprocessor-Version: 7.2 -- ListProcessor by CREN

>
>Subtypes and parameters exist to tighten up a specification.  Use them.
>
>I would suggest consolidating your proposal into a single subtype, 3D, and
>then use parameters for the futher detail.  So you'd be using MODEL/3D, but
>there would be space for other kinds of models.

Humm... so IGES, VRML, and MESH would be parameters of 3D?

Interesting.

But MESH supports 4D now, and VRML will support 4D "soon".  Perhaps
3D and 4D?   No, 3D/4D is probably the wrong word.  Let's think 
about something else.

On the other hand, this would avoid some of the other problems that have 
been suggested with different types of models which are not necessarily 3D.

Please continue your train of thought.

SDN



-- 

+----------------------------------------------------+
|Scott D. Nelson   B131  Rm2074    3-1250            |
|Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory              |
|7000 East Ave., L-153     Livermore CA 94550        |
|email: nelson18@llnl.gov  http://www-dsed.llnl.gov/ |
+----------------------------------------------------+

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email