Re: [mmox] RealExtend Teleporting Between Worlds

[Jon Watte <[e-mail]>]

Lawson English wrote:
> How many languages will we be using? There's only a handful of 
> graphics engines to worry about, regardless of language. Seems to me 
> that SL uses OpenGL while others use DirecctX. I'm not advocating 
> OpenGL and DirectX compatibility, so we're left with describing things 
> in terms of one graphics engine. Are you suggesting that Linden Lab 
> standard trees are too complex to bother with implementing algorithms 
> for in your favorite language + OpenGL?

I am suggesting that the problem is a lot wider than just trees.
There.com describes terrain as a guided fractal system. Are you saying 
everyone should implement that system to be able to display There.com 
terrain?
OLIVE describes objects in the form of composition of baser types using 
XML schema. Are you saying everyone should implement that system to be 
able to display OLIVE objects?

Or are trees somehow special, when all other kinds of geometry or 
objects (buildings, water, ships, humans, weapons, telephones, cars, 
...) are somehow less special? Who decides what kinds of geometry are 
special, and what the "canonical form" of those kinds of geometry are?
I believe that trying to go that line of reasoning will end up in very 
much effort, and very much bickering, for very little actual benefit. 
It's much easier to say "entity at point 3,4,5 uses mesh 
http://www.second-life.com/models/tree-oak2.dae."

Sincerely,

jw