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

[Meadhbh Hamrick <[e-mail]>]

i guess that's true (that the more we have that's region oriented the
better.) the two uses of locations i'm thinking about now are: a)
specifying the endpoint of a teleport and b) specifying a location so
a client can retrieve information about the location (map tile, how
many avatars are present, human friendly region name, etc.)

if we assume a service that can convert a region name into a URL to
act as an endpoint for teleport, we could get away without a global
coordinate system. and heck, you don't absolutely NEED that service,
you only need it if you want to convert something like
"Levenhall/128/128/32" into a URL to complete a teleport request.

-cheers
-meadhbh

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Joshua Bell <[e-mail]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 5:59 AM, Carlo Wood <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> My point was, there is only a need for a 3 dimensional cartesian
>> coordinate
>> system really, relative to a region.
>
> I tend to agree. The more that can be region-centric, the better. If a
> provider of a collection-of-regions wants to define relationships between
> even disconnected locations, that shouldn't be precluded, but it doesn't
> appear *necessary*...
> That said, I believe it adds complexity to region crossings. In SL, an agent
> crossing between regions maintains global coordinates throughout. The agent
> is also notified about things happening across region boundaries with
> coordinates that would be outside the region bounds. This will probably make
> code for hand-offs and/or the scene graph more intricate.
>
>>
>> In order to be able to show map, it should be possible map regions
>> to some 2 dimensional coordinate system.
>>
>
> Interesting question: is this part of VWRAP or not? Is there a need for
> standards around mapping, or is that just a feature which can be provided in
> other ways (e.g. web-based UI) that produces the URIs (which are
> specifically URLs to resources containing region connection information, as
> this thread suggests) necessary to "go there"?
> (This is part of the topic I want to cover in Anaheim.)