Re: [ogpx] OGPX WG draft charter, 2009-08-19 revision

[Morgaine <[e-mail]>]

Meadhbh is once again misrepresenting people:

On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 6:54 PM, Meadhbh Siobhan
<[e-mail]>wrote;wrote, in answer to Carlo:

> Are you seriously suggesting that Linden Lab should not participate in
> the development of an open virtual worlds protocol? wha?
>

No, Carlo did not suggest that.  Carlo simply asked for an answer on whether
OGP would also cover interop between more than one virtual world.  Joshua's
latest group charter does not list such communication in the scope of OGPX,
and therefore Carlo's question is a good one.

 I have also been misrepresented, but that is of no matter compared to
getting the scope of OGPX clarified cleanly and openly, so that we know
exactly what the protocol will be specified to do and what it will not
address.


Morgaine.









On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 6:54 PM, Meadhbh Siobhan
<[e-mail]>wrote;wrote:

> Are you seriously suggesting that Linden Lab should not participate in
> the development of an open virtual worlds protocol? wha?
>
> We originally wanted to have a working group where we could resolve
> issues that separate different virtual worlds protocols. That group
> was MMOX, and at the BoF we couldn't even get agreement as to what the
> term "interoperable" meant.
>
> Because we could not get agreement, this effort (OGPX) was initiated.
> Our objective is NOT to define a protocol that encompasses every
> existent virtual world. It is to produce a protocol that may be used
> by deployers to produce one, two or many distinct virtual worlds.
> Deployers would then get to decide which virtual worlds they wish to
> interact with. They may also choose to provide access to some or all
> of their "virtual real estate" to other participants through a
> federation scheme. This latter use case is considered the most common
> use case, because it allows virtual worlds deployers to share part of
> their world without requiring them to share ALL of their world.
>
> Morgaine has several times mentioned she does not agree with the
> approach we are taking. I do not apologize that those of us who
> organized the MMOX and OGPX BoFs have requirements different from
> hers. Nor do I apologize for taking the "let's boil the ocean one
> thimble at a time," approach. At the end of the day, there are people
> interested in deploying open virtual worlds, that are implemented
> using an open protocol. If people wish to participate constructively
> in this effort with us, we will participate with them. If people wish
> to discount the experience of over six years of deploying virtual
> worlds, and a business model that DEPENDS on providing services to
> others, they can participate in other standardization efforts.
>
> -Cheers
> -Meadhbh / Infinity
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 7:18 AM, Carlo Wood<[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > I think that what Morgaine is trying to say is that
> > if Linden Lab's official (or hidden) policy is to NOT
> > interop with other virtual worlds, then they are not
> > the right party to trust when it comes to defining
> > a protocol that most, if not all, other parties DO
> > want to support interop.
> >
> > Since it seems, at this point, that the policy of
> > LL will prohibit interop in the future between
> > SL and other grids, there is a lack of trust right now;
> > and as a result of that lack of trust, a very clear
> > statement about the intent of the OGPX (as opposed to LL)
> > about interop MUST be part of this draft.
> >
> > Personally, I will reject any protocol that doesn't
> > make it a priority to concentrate on interoperability
> > (such as sharing LM's and teleporting). So, instead
> > of adding a paragraph that clearly states that the
> > objective of OGPX is to not support interop, I'd rather
> > see a paragraph added that clearly states that it
> > IS to support interop.
> >
> > The keyword here being "clearly". That is certainly
> > not the case at the moment.
> >
> > --
> > Carlo Wood <[e-mail]>
> > _______________________________________________
> > ogpx mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx
> >
>