Open Standards for Real-Time 3D Communication

I am far away from the opinion that VRML/X3D is in any kind of trouble (How many times have we heard that before?). In trouble perhaps, is misinterpreted, broken, or misguided visions of what VRML/X3D is, but in itself VRML/X3D is very well thank you.

Continue reading "What VRML/X3D is obviously good for or not" »

Posted by Lauren Gauthier on 2007-02-14 | Permalink | (2) Comments

So, despite premature announcements of the death of VRML, it is alive and well in the form of X3D. No other single real-time 3D technology has prevailed as long and continued to evolve despite a steady barrage of (often unfounded) criticism.

Continue reading "X3D: Strength in content longevity without compromising quality" »

Posted by Brian Hay on 2007-02-12 | Permalink | Comments

I am often asked why X3D and VRML players have not consolidated down to 1 or 2 implementations. The question typically comes about due to the costs of maintaining so many different implementations. Why can't we just have one solid implementation and all use that? Wouldn't it be much easier if like Flash we had one system for content authors to deploy too?

Continue reading "Why can’t we just have one solid X3D implementation and all use that?" »

Posted by Alan Hudson on 2007-02-02 | Permalink | Comments

The Open Geospatial Consortium's current Geospatial Web efforts define standards for delivering 2D map data over the internet. What the Web3D X3D Earth initiative can contribute might be something like a "Web Viewpoint Service" - the ability to query and deliver geospatial data from a perspective other than a 2D bounding box with a zoom function - i.e. the 3D Geospatial Web.

Continue reading "X3D Earth and the Geospatial Web - the development of a Web Viewpoint Service?" »

Posted by Rita Turkowski on 2006-12-19 | Permalink | (2) Comments

The X3D working group is concluding another great year with lots of accomplishments. We have had a steady stream of specification improvements, and currently a stable X3D Revision 2 Amendment 1 (aka X3D version 3.2) is undergoing international ISO review. Viewing tools, authoring tools and content keep getting better and better. More people and more software are adopting X3D. Importers and exporters are becoming robust. The benefits of XML and ability to use other XML-related Web standards are adding lots of value. Specification comments & bug reports steadily keep coming in, making our standard stronger and better each time. We're on our way!

Continue reading "X3D interoperability and widespread deployment as the goals for 2007" »

Posted by Don Brutzman on 2006-12-18 | Permalink | Comments

X3D/VRML has made great strides as standard for creating complex synthesized 3D worlds and visualizations. However it is a different story when it comes to the audio and sound manipulation using X3D. In general, the 3D community has struggled with how to link X3D entities and environments to interactive audio control. We've started a project to integrate FreeWRL with ReWire. This project has the potential to introduce X3D to those who are actually into making or manipulating music, beyond the traditional X3D coder base!

Continue reading "Interactive high-quality audio control using X3D" »

Posted by John Stewart on 2006-12-05 | Permalink | (2) Comments

I was recently asked this question: "I don't really see why I want to generate X3D when I can just call OpenGL and write my own code.?" Sure, you can. But to write it efficiently requires lots of acquired knowledge.

Continue reading "The sweet spot of X3D is bringing 3D graphics to a wider audience" »

Posted by Alan Hudson on 2006-11-21 | Permalink | (3) Comments

Make it simple.

If you spent weeks, months or years creating a symphony and then came back to it ten years later, you would want it to still be playable by competent musicians.  Right? Some 3D artists want the same thing and today, the best deal they have for that is VRML/X3D.  I still have the Irishspace CD, a project that was large in scope when it was created over ten years ago by a team of VRML artists from around the world.  My son pulled it out to test his new computer.  He downloaded a Blaxxun Contact VRML/X3D client for free.  He put the CD on.  Guess what?  It all still works.  The difference is, it looks better and runs faster.

Ten years ago I started work on the River of Life world.  This week after a long hiatus, I’m working on it again.  I haven’t changed any of the geometry.  I’ve retextured. I’ve added new features.  It all works.  I put a proto in it for a sky simulation that Braden McDaniel wrote so long ago that he’d forgotten he wrote it until I showed it to him.  I plopped it in the…

Continue reading "To The Artists and Content Owners" »

Posted by Len Bullard on 2006-11-16 | Permalink | (4) Comments

There has been a lot of discussion comparing VRML/X3D to Second Life (SL) and MMORPG such as World of Warcraft (WOW). To some it appears that X3D is simply too difficult to use and the money is going to be made in SL or similar “user friendly environment” that are focused on social spaces and shared worlds. The argument further goes that building behaviors and hacking geometry in VRML/X3D are too difficult for mass market use.

Continue reading "VRML and X3D don’t suck. If we don’t get that, we suck." »

Posted by Len Bullard on 2006-11-15 | Permalink | (3) Comments

In the evolution of a technology family based on standards and specifications, there comes a point where an unnoticeable shift begins away from the academic or early-adopter dominance of the market for that technology and toward the commercial users.  X3D/VRML has reached that point.

Continue reading "The Quiet Tipping Point of Commercial Standards" »

Posted by Len Bullard on 2006-10-20 | Permalink | Comments