Re: [ogpx] Tourist use case

[Morgaine <[e-mail]>]

On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 12:38 AM, Lawson English <[e-mail]> wrote:

>
> It seems to me that the MOST touristy mode we will ever see is the
> free-for-all from the original OGP test where simple TP and naught else was
> supported.
>


There was no "free-for-all" interop in the original OGP test:  there was
merely TP from an SL grid to several separately-administered sims, with no
framework in place for such sims to express their independent policies, nor
any design for such a framework.  This was unable to support a tourism model
at all since that requires DDP otherwise travellers from multiple worlds
having distinct policies can't meet up in a common tourist resort.  It was
very far indeed from a free-for-all.  In fact it was much more like a plan
for region assimilation by an advancing empire. ;-)  All it could ever do is
build walled gardens.

Your comment also needs to be examined in another light.  "The MOST touristy
mode we will ever see" *from whom*?  Your words seem to presuppose that only
the deployments by the current majority provider are relevant.

It's important not to confuse what an individual world provider such as LL
will do, and what the whole set of deployers of the protocol will do.  If we
are successful in specifying VWRAP services flexibly as envisaged by David,
we can expect all the possible deployment patterns to be exercised to
different degrees across the breadth of the Internet by many different
providers and many individuals.

More specifically, it is reasonable to assume that the Opensim developers,
deployers and users who are present in the workgroup are here because they
believe that the protocol can be designed in a manner that is useful to
their intended interop and world models.  They're already working on various
kinds of open interop model, with or without VWRAP, so the need to support
tourism flexibly is not just a theory.

If we do a good job and VWRAP becomes an effective means of implementing the
kind of interop that the very broad Opensim-based community finds useful,
then there is every likelihood that the high-tourism deployments will become
very popular indeed, *in that community*.  That's my answer to the *from
whom* question.

People want to travel to far-off places, in virtual worlds as much as in the
physical world.  This desire is fueled by world *diversity*, not by seeing
more of the same thing within one's own world alone.  We can reasonably
expect this to make tourism between independent worlds hugely attractive,
even exciting, and hence popular.


Morgaine.





======================================

On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 12:38 AM, Lawson English <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Meadhbh Hamrick wrote:
>
>> but didn't we say that we were going to focus on "second life-like"
>> worlds in this WG? isn't that why it was formed? shouldn't the tourist
>> model be an effort of the MMOX group? i thought that was the reason we
>> kept the MMOX mailing list up, so work could continue on that type of
>> virtual world.
>>
>> -meadhbh/infinity
>>
>>
>
> It seems to me that the MOST touristy mode we will ever see is the
> free-for-all from the original OGP test where
> simple TP and naught else was supported.
>
> Will all worlds be willing to support that one? Obviously not (e.g
> firewalled corporate site), but I think many will, including LL on the PG
> section of its main grid.
>
>
> Lawson
>