Re: [ogpx] URI schema for virtual world locations?

[Han Sontse <[e-mail]>]

I don't think we can assume a client is the requester.
If it was a browser, then the mapping service might return
a rendered map of the area, or even a rendered view
of the location as an image embedded in a webpage.

http://www.vw.maps.service.tld/?loc=UUID

Or something similar.  The notion here is that
at some point a client in the world requested the location
from the mapping service and got the URL back.

How the mapping service manages the UUID mapping to location
is implementation specific for the VW.   If a client requests this
the mapping service is going to know that it's dealing with a client,
rather than a browser.

Han

On Jan 21, 2010, at 11:13 AM, Meadhbh Hamrick wrote:

> dan, i see where you're going with that. here's some comments.
>
> i think we're trying to use one mechanism to do multiple things.
>
> first, i think we're trying to identify a location in the consensual
> hallucination of the virtual world. infinity's virtual home at
> Levenhall/76/204/22 exists in the same apparent location with respect
> to the surrounding regions despite the fact that the host that
> simulates that region changes (last i checked, Levenhall was being
> simulated on sim9809.agni.lindenlab.com.)
>
> second, we want to provide unique references to locations for use in
> protocol transactions.
>
> third, we want to provide service endpoints to complete different
> protocol interactions (teleport, for instance.)
>
> my big fear is that if we use one mechanism for everything, we may
> fail. i think i was thinking of use case number 2 and you're thinking
> of use case number 3. use case number 1 requires us to think about
> maps and the layout of regions in the virtual world.
>
> so maybe the idea of a URN scheme to identify virtual locations is a
> good one. maybe something like:
>
> urn:vwloc:<region name>:<x>:<y>:<z>
>
> (example... urn:vwloc:Levenhall:76:204:22)
>
> but the limitation here is that it would imply a single region name to
> service endpoint mapping service. but maybe that's okay in some cases?
>
> in the general case, we want to be able to email a URN like this to
> someone and without them having prior knowledge of the mapping
> service, they're able to use the location name to find the service
> endpoint their viewer will use to visit the location.
>
> but.. the service to do the mapping is probably at a service
> endpoint... so maybe that's the URL we're trying to define.
>
> anyway. lotsa options.
>
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Dan Olivares  
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> Counter Proposal:
>>
>> If we're going to not use URIs..    which were meant as resource
>> locators....   and make our own resource locators..   lets at least
>> include all of the relevant information to make our own technology
>> effective.
>>
>> ---- Modifications to previous proposal-----
>> so rather than have something like:
>>
>>  secondlife://example.com/Levenhall/128/128/32
>>
>> we would define a LLIDL map like:
>>
>> {
>>
>>  region_protocol: string,
>>  region_address : string,
>>  region_port: int,
>>  region_name : string,
>>  location : [ int, int, int ]
>> }
>>
>> and then serialize it as:
>>
>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
>> <llsd>
>>  <map>
>>   <key>region_protocol</key>
>>   <string>OGP</string>
>>   <key>region_address</key>
>>   <string>myregion.mycoolsimulatorfarm.com</string>
>>   <key>region_port</key>
>>   <int>94</int>
>>   <key>region_name</key>
>>   <string>Levenhall</string>
>>   <key>location</key>
>>   <array>
>>     <integer>128</integer>
>>     <integer>128</integer>
>>     <integer>32</integer>
>>   </array>
>>  <map>
>> </llsd>
>>
>> Possible protocols could be XMLRPC, OGP/VWrap, <insert another 3rd
>> party system here>.
>> Instead of the region_address, region_port, and region_protocol, it
>> could potentially have the http address to the region domain.
>>
>> LLIDL map like:
>>
>> {
>>
>>  region_domain: string,
>>  region_name : string,
>>  location : [ int, int, int ]
>> }
>>
>> and then serialize it as:
>>
>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
>> <llsd>
>>  <map>
>>   <key>region_domain</key>
>>   <string>http://www.osgrid.org/VWrap/RegionDomain/put</string>
>>   <key>region_name</key>
>>   <string>Levenhall</string>
>>   <key>location</key>
>>   <array>
>>     <integer>128</integer>
>>     <integer>128</integer>
>>     <integer>32</integer>
>>   </array>
>>  <map>
>> </llsd>
>> ...
>>
>> Daniel Olivares
>> http://www.google.com/profiles/dcolivares
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Meadhbh Hamrick
>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>> the seondlife URI scheme is a hack used to automagically launch  
>>> the SL
>>> viewer based on web interaction like with the map @ slurl.com. as i
>>> read it, the point of a location URI in the protocol is to provide a
>>> mechanism for carrying information in a point in a virtual world.
>>> instead of abusing URIs like we have in the past, maybe we should
>>> define a LLIDL map for containing information about a location, then
>>> use more traditional URLs to point to the location of these  
>>> services.
>>>
>>> so rather than have something like:
>>>
>>>   secondlife://example.com/Levenhall/128/128/32
>>>
>>> we would define a LLIDL map like:
>>>
>>> {
>>>  region_name : string,
>>>  location : [ int, int, int ]
>>> }
>>>
>>> and then serialize it as:
>>>
>>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
>>> <llsd>
>>>  <map>
>>>    <key>region_name</key>
>>>    <string>Levenhall</string>
>>>    <key>location</key>
>>>    <array>
>>>      <integer>128</integer>
>>>      <integer>128</integer>
>>>      <integer>32</integer>
>>>    </array>
>>>  <map>
>>> </llsd>
>>>
>>> and maybe make them available at a traditional URL like:
>>>
>>> http://example.com/regions/3F05D047-B5AF-4332-938E-675A1EA1D784
>>>
>>> this would have the advantage that implementers could easily stuff
>>> experimental new parameters into the serialization. if we used the
>>> mime types in the client application launch message draft (
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-hamrick-ogp-launch-00 ) then we  
>>> could
>>> hack our web browsers to recognize the application/ogpcal+xml  
>>> content
>>> type and pass it to a client application of our choice.
>>>
>>> so.. to recap.. secondlife style URIs should be deprecated (or at
>>> least not used in VWRAP.) we should use URLs that use a well known
>>> protocol (like https) that describe a protocol endpoint for  
>>> retrieving
>>> an LLSD blob with the information we're interested in.
>>>
>>> -cheers
>>> -meadhbh
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 1:24 PM, Hurliman, John <[e-mail] 
>>> > wrote:
>>>> I’ve seen a few places in the I-Ds and OGP wiki documents that  
>>>> refer to a
>>>> URI schema for a location in a virtual world (home location,  
>>>> requested login
>>>> location, etc). Has this been defined or discussed yet? I see the  
>>>> SLURL
>>>> format of:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> secondlife://region%20name/x/y/z
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> How would this change to accommodate a location in any region  
>>>> domain?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> John
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> ogpx mailing list
>>>> [e-mail]
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ogpx mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx
>>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> ogpx mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx