[vwrap] what's wrong with starting small?

[Meadhbh Hamrick <[e-mail]>]

so we have a recommendation from at least two implementers (myself and
john) that we focus on a small subset of an overall virtual world
problem domain.

it seems to me that diva/christina and morgaine are pushing for a more
expansive problem domain.

can i ask, what is the issue we have with starting small and then
growing the problem domain?

i think i remember an IETF "old hand" (it might have even been barry)
say that it's a LOT easier to go back to the IAB / IESG and ask to add
things to your charter than it is to remove them.

i'm also thinking that some of the tension in this group is over the
conflicting objectives between the "expansionist" block and the
"dimunitivist" block. but it also seems that we're not horribly far
off from each other in terms of wire protocol.

maybe a solution could be to draft two documents... one a "long term"
goal for virtual worlds that describes the "expansionist" objectives
and another that is a little more short term and describes the
"diminutivist" objective for a small subset of things needed for the
long term goals?

is the concern with this approach that any near term service (service
establishment, event queue, teleport, assets) would need to know about
the totality of the virtual world in order to be practical?

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