Re: [vwrap] Consensus? What exactly should be in the protocol

On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Cristina Videira Lopes
<lopes@ics.uci.edu> wrote:
> Cristina Videira Lopes wrote:
>>
>> You can dictate that. But then this will be completely irrelevant in a
>> couple of years when WebGL is actually usable or when Google finishes their
>> virtual machine for running safe native code on browsers.
>
> ...or when server-side streaming goes mainstream, and being in a virtual
> world is as simple as running a video player plus a few JavaScript/native
> back channels to the server.
>
> First point is: according to the Web principles, each web application
> controls 100% what and how the client gets via this really powerful concept
> of hypermedia. It is unlikely that the world is going to adopt a standard
> that forces implementers to take several steps back on this kind of
> autonomy. The diversity is what gives service providers an edge.

hold on there! you just gave two completely opposing examples. if i
have a video player that's receiving raster lines from a distant game
server, that's TOTALLY the opposite of a client having complete
control over it's hypermedia input. if i simply started streaming an
OnLive session of someone doing SecondLife in a flash based video
player, there's absolutely no way to guarantee that the data used to
create the scene would be available to the client.

> The second point is: when we have all that variety of viewer implementations
> that are all equally accepted by the web browser, we are still to cope with
> portability of user agent simulation state between those worlds -- and
> that's the bottom line for interoperability of virtual worlds on the Web.
> I'm interested in this, because it's much more foundational than the variety
> of virtual world implementation options.

also... the virtual world is not a web application.

if you look at typical web apps, the mashing up is usually done at the
server side, turned into HTML and then sent to the browser.

we're starting to see a lot more apps where JavaScript is used to do
mashups in the client, but...

VWRAP was chartered to work on server-authoritative worlds (like
Second Life and OpenSim.) that means there's a lot of state in the
simulator. it sounds like you want to open this state up and push its
simulation to the edge of the network (and thus support
co-simulation.)

did i read that right? did you really just say that virtual worlds are
client web apps?

>
> _______________________________________________
> vwrap mailing list
> vwrap@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap
>