Re: [vwrap] Call for a vote on interop BETWEEN independent virtual worlds or not

[Meadhbh Hamrick <[e-mail]>]

fair enough. morgaine, please accept my apology for responding to you
in a manner in which you consider dismissive.

--
meadhbh hamrick * it's pronounced "maeve"
@OhMeadhbh * http://meadhbh.org/ * [e-mail]



On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 1:17 PM, Morgaine
<[e-mail]> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 8:23 PM, Meadhbh Hamrick <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
> the issue is not whether we "understand" the concept of a virtual
> world, but whether it has meaning to people writing software. i know
> you don't understand this since you're not a software developer, but
> ultimately someone has to write code. and that code will make certain
> assumptions about it's execution environment and which network peers
> it trusts.
>
>
> Do we really have to have condescending replies of this kind on the list?
>
> The person concerned knows very well that I'm a software developer of very
> long experience, and is doing this for effect.  Please leave personal
> references off this forum.  We have more than enough technical issues to
> deal with here, and we don't need this at all.
>
>
> Morgaine.
>
>
>
>
>
> ===================================
>
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 8:23 PM, Meadhbh Hamrick <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 11:11 AM, Morgaine
>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> > Joshua, you're right, this subject has been recycled more times than we
>> > can
>> > remember.  What's more, EXACTLY as you wrote back in October 2009, on
>> > each
>> > occasion we arrived at the same conclusion, namely that no matter in
>> > which
>> > terms we describe our protocol, it will provide what ordinary users of
>> > VWs
>> > recognize as interop between their worlds.
>>
>> um. what's this "we" we're talking about?
>>
>> > In other words, if we have two virtual worlds such as OSgrid and 3rd
>> > Rock
>> > Grid, then if those worlds wish it, they could use VWRAP to enable an
>> > agent
>> > to teleport from one to the other and to retain avatar properties and
>> > assets
>> > after the TP, as one commonly sought example.  The user perspective on
>> > this
>> > is extremely simple, and all-important.  It cannot be ignored just
>> > because
>> > some document writers profess not to understand the term "virtual
>> > world".
>> > (Everyone else does.)
>>
>> the issue is not whether we "understand" the concept of a virtual
>> world, but whether it has meaning to people writing software. i know
>> you don't understand this since you're not a software developer, but
>> ultimately someone has to write code. and that code will make certain
>> assumptions about it's execution environment and which network peers
>> it trusts.
>>
>> the assumption in this group was originally that we would have "domain
>> decomposition." we later changed that to "service decomposition." this
>> allows software developers to build software for "services" which
>> deployers can configure into "virtual experiences."
>>
>> > The above kind of interop is either possible with VWRAP or it is not.
>> > The
>> > phrase "no interop BETWEEN virtual worlds" denies the possibility point
>> > blank, and while it's nice to try to smooth it over as an artifact of
>> > terminology, we are faced with diametric opposites here.
>>
>> no. the phrase "no interop BETWEEN virtual worlds" means two things:
>>
>> a. we are not doing interop between two distinct virtual worlds that
>> use different protocols (the WoW vs. SL example.)
>> b. the protocol does not REQUIRE a participant to implement a complete
>> virtual world. a participant in the protocol may decide to implement
>> only a single service.
>>
>> it has always meant this, despite the fact it's not what  you're
>> interested in.
>>
>> > While I agree with you entirely that there is (near unanimous) consensus
>> > that we are doing interop between virtual worlds (even if using
>> > different
>> > language), the drafts do not reflect that, and as Crista detailed,
>> > barely
>> > have any relevance to OpenSimulator-based worlds at all.
>>
>> repeat after me: VWRAP is not HyperGrid. VWRAP is not OpenSim. VWRAP
>> is not Linden Lab. VWRAP is not Second Life.
>>
>> > As many people have said, we need to fix the language of the drafts so
>> > that
>> > it reflects our interop goals clearly, because it fails to do that at
>> > the
>> > moment.
>>
>> i have requested on several occasions that you provide a list of
>> issues you have with ANY of the drafts.
>>
>> when you provide comments of the form: "the document says <this> and i
>> would prefer it says <that> because ..." then you will find that your
>> comments are addressed.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> vwrap mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
>
>