Re: [mmox] RealExtend Teleporting Between Worlds

[Lawson English <[e-mail]>]

Jon Watte wrote:
> 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."
>

Ah, OK, though,  it seems to me that SOME things should be built into 
the client in some ways, while others can be downloadable as separate 
meshes... perhaps some way of compromising...

a profile might say "uses SL trees, available as this plugin and 
connection or from server xyz as generic meshes and OLIVE objects, 
available via this plugin and connection or from server uvw as generic 
meshes"

etc.


L