Re: [vwrap] What abstract type systems already exist?

Morgaine <morgaine.dinova@googlemail.com> Tue, 10 May 2011 04:23 UTC

Return-Path: <morgaine.dinova@googlemail.com>
X-Original-To: vwrap@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: vwrap@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40D73E06E2 for <vwrap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 May 2011 21:23:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.926
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.926 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EEEs3Y1CX-QC for <vwrap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 May 2011 21:23:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qy0-f179.google.com (mail-qy0-f179.google.com [209.85.216.179]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8D27E0791 for <vwrap@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 May 2011 21:23:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qyk7 with SMTP id 7so4492095qyk.10 for <vwrap@ietf.org>; Mon, 09 May 2011 21:23:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=NyzWyuZaODYlXBTL/66g9cprGkmIT/6+E27XTtJK6Qk=; b=VCcy7WkcrNb0Dft/ZNAVDKKQWFrGdP5bzT7IsrmSLqmY8DgDHB7eWKfuVC7mRbog2f TL3MZILpL7C44Wa6/g8C7T9skO4l2YExNvLcKCMT1NQ6UovpefrQV5QQB6Idb17irca1 w2q6vtiKffzJldSBN8dMKmeVcoTcvdIOYMMcU=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=bgkFYjD5PacCKlDZBTxACaZmp6IRER/B4TOc997XFbx0mET5cnTSEprODCqJMmqz8W DICli3wAh1n3RcybC+EczWNf1JJTmrBtRECl2AerFT/w2klyoiClVwNNxppL4DNIi9ho IwEjFxqTKmhLdqwv73630yO1nfFh9/aTGrdRw=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.44.141 with SMTP id a13mr5537670qcf.101.1305000904518; Mon, 09 May 2011 21:15:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.66.212 with HTTP; Mon, 9 May 2011 21:15:04 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTincu6V3SAgZEnDWGnU_-TQwFZLMGg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4DC85049.40600@boroon.dasgupta.ch> <BANLkTincu6V3SAgZEnDWGnU_-TQwFZLMGg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 05:15:04 +0100
Message-ID: <BANLkTimF0UELZ8uPDuPG6tnwgDP5APXfNQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Morgaine <morgaine.dinova@googlemail.com>
To: vwrap@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636831fa0586dda04a2e4336d
Subject: Re: [vwrap] What abstract type systems already exist?
X-BeenThere: vwrap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Virtual World Region Agent Protocol - IETF working group <vwrap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/vwrap>, <mailto:vwrap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/vwrap>
List-Post: <mailto:vwrap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:vwrap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap>, <mailto:vwrap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 04:23:03 -0000

Joshua, it was interesting to read in the P1828 working group's description
that they are concerned with "interoperability of avatars and objects
between and among virtual world environments".  That could apply just as
well to us.

Do you recall whether the P1828 group has a concept resembling our shared
asset services to achieve that?


Morgaine.





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

On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 12:50 AM, Joshua Bell <josh@lindenlab.com>; wrote:

> On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Boroondas Gupte <
> sllists@boroon.dasgupta.ch>; wrote:
>
>> *What abstract type systems do currently exist *("exist" as in published
>> and sufficiently documented. Don't have to be formally standardized, though
>> if they are, that's a plus.)* and how do they compare to LLSD?*
>>
>
> This is an excellent question.
>
> For what it's worth, it's possible that at least the first part of this
> question has been explored as it relates to virtual worlds by the IEEE P1828
> working group http://standards.ieee.org/develop/project/1828.html on
> virtual worlds. I'm on the mailing list (as are some other VWRAP list
> members, I believe) but confess to not having spent any significant time
> engaged with the group.
>
> What I do know is that P1828 members have performed a number of technology
> surveys. The working group is not focused on any particular architecture for
> virtual worlds (as chartered, VWRAP has a fairly specific approach in mind),
> and is instead looking broadly at possible technologies to embrace as "best
> practices" for virtual worlds. The P1828 working group's discussion list is
> http://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?A0=VWSTANDARDWKGRP - you might find it
> worthwhile to peruse archives and/or engage in discussions with that group
> regarding this and other issues where consensus on a new or converging
> design is not the driving factor (as it tends to be within IETF groups) but
> exploring existing technologies for suitability within a problem domain.
>
> NOTE: The IEEE doubtless has different intellectual property rules applying
> to discussion on its lists than the IETF, so make sure to read whatever
> equivalent of the Note Well exists over yonder.
>
> -- Josh
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> vwrap mailing list
> vwrap@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
>
>