Re: [vwrap] Conditioners and refineries

[Morgaine <[e-mail]>]

There is no default format, and nowhere does VWRAP deal in SL-compatible
grids.

We are defining a services-oriented architecture which is nothing like that
of today's SL, and we cannot for a moment assume that SL will adopt it in
the future, as that is their choice, not ours.

The only partly-compatible VW frameworks over which we have a small amount
of influence are Opensim and realXtend (which uses Opensim server-side),
because we can take their open source code and adapt it to our protocols if
we wish.  In that sense, we could be said to be defining an
Opensim-compatible protocol, but never an SL-compatible protocol.  That
would be a misapprehension.

We occasionally say that we are defining an SL-like *data* architecture, but
even that isn't really correct since VWRAP doesn't favor one in-world
content type over another.  All content types are denoted merely by a type
tag and there is no standard set of content types required.

So what is the real commonality between VWRAP and SL?  Currently, only LLSD
is reasonably compatible with SL, although LLSD might well change in more
than just its name if we find the current spec not sufficiently powerful or
lacking extensibility for our needs.


Morgaine.




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

On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 4:21 PM, Dzonatas Sol <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Don't need to assume too much like that, Morgaine; however, we need
> something more of "trust domains" defined and the example(s) I wrote about
> fit in well as lead-in. I stated these use-cases specially to avoid the use
> of terminology that now exists, and this leans towards the need to center on
> "trust domains." I see the use of current client/server-* terminology
> continually to confuse us (even if some like it, not all do). If we have to
> think about such terminology for more than 90 seconds each time then it
> needs to change.
>
> My side-point was that VWs may have their own object format in their world,
> and I'm thinking more then just the regions that exist now that the
> monolithic client connects. Perhaps, others only think about SL compatible
> grids, and don't worry about the default format.
>
> Morgaine wrote:
>
>> We've maintained throughout that our protocols would be extensible with
>> regard to data formats, allowing worlds and user expectations to evolve
>> without requiring protocol redefinition.
>>
>> In the area of meshes, it is very much to be expected that COLLADA will
>> figure strongly among the graphic formats used (particularly since it was
>> chosen for the iED initiative), but it's not of any special interest to the
>> VWRAP protocols other than as a potential content type.� All we have to do
>> is to make sure that we label each transfer with its appropriate type, and
>> possibly also include other metadata that may be needed.
>>
>> We're certainly not standardizing what graphics are used in virtual
>> worlds, beyond assigning types where they might not yet exist.� Hardwiring
>> them would be a recipe not for extensibility but for stagnation.� Other
>> bodies may be standardizing which graphics formats are used, whereas we're
>> trying to define useful deployment architectures and standardizing the
>> protocols through which they are accessed.
>>
>>
>> Morgaine.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ===================
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 3:34 AM, Dzonatas Sol <[e-mail]<mailto:
>> [e-mail]>> wrote:
>>
>>    If we say the conditioner basically authenticates or re-signs an
>>    asset from grid X to grid Y, and the refinery would make sure the
>>    physics of the object described by the asset is translated from
>>    the topology of grid X to the topology of grid Y, then this is
>>    basically what COLLADA expects in exchange. This exchange is this
>>    different from the usual import/export process. It doesn't have to
>>    be this exact process, as this is only an example to us be more
>>    familiar.
>>
>>    It seems a complete waste to not realize that LL has implemented
>>    the import process and physics refinery into their browser, and
>>    this very feature, though not fully automated as such, could be
>>    used to help move assets in-between grids/v-worlds. Since the
>>    import is from local basis, the authentication is not implemented.
>>    What's to stop to basically export to DAE format on the local
>>    storage, from one world, and continue to import that DAE into
>>    another grid.
>>
>>    Note that the refineries may be proprietary. They may produce
>>    non-COLLADA formats (from DAE files) that are for optimal
>>    render/display capability of the software "client" (i.e. that the
>>    end-user has to view graphics).
>>
>>    As with Google Earth and Sony HOME, they already have their assets
>>    conditioned and refined for those virtual worlds such that they
>>    can optimally display them. The key note is not the optimal
>>    display, as it is about being able to exchange and use in other
>>    virtual worlds.
>>
>>    The DAE format does have extensive abilities, yet the goal of
>>    COLLADA is still to define the basic material, scripts, model, etc
>>    in the most portable format. The DAE may contain hybrid or
>>    specific formats that is stored in the extensions, so that custom
>>    objects are retained/transferred.
>>
>>    If virtual worlds start to not agree upon how they store objects,
>>    I see COLLADA as the default format for digital asset exchange.
>>
>>
>> https://collada.org/mediawiki/index.php/COLLADA_FAQ#What_are_the_major_features_of_this_format.3F
>>
>>    (Yes, we can put all inventory items in DAE format through the
>>    user-data and asset extensions, despite the format mainly being
>>    for 3D... just sayin')
>>
>>    --     --- https://twitter.com/Dzonatas_Sol ---
>>    Web Development, Software Engineering, Virtual Reality, Consultant
>>
>>    _______________________________________________
>>    vwrap mailing list
>>    [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>
>>    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> vwrap mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> --- https://twitter.com/Dzonatas_Sol ---
> Web Development, Software Engineering, Virtual Reality, Consultant
>
>