>> every point you make
neil seems to have the taint of fiscal responsibility all over it
Yes. The Consortium is a
non-profit - fiscal responsibility is required. But more than that
- if the Consortium is to complement the community it needs some funds
to do so - I believe.
>> I have constantly said
that the consortium need to watch dog the companies for proper usage, spec
interpretation, deployment and interoperability.
Agreed - we are trying to put
together a long-overdue conformance test suite - but it sure would go faster
if we had some funds :)
>> more often these solutions
are market and financially driven.. not driven by the force of vr itself,
sad isnt it?
No - I don't believe it is sad
- the way to make VR happen is through successful products and companies
>> Neil, as the president
of the web3d consortium it falls to you to provide some sort of leadership
in this area
Yes - that's what I am engaged
in here :) But I am not a application developer - it is applications
that will catalyze the market need. I believe the leadership that
the Consortium needs is to patiently prepare the background infrastructure
for great apps to take root in. Glamorous? No. Necessary?
I believe so - that's why I am still here.
Neil
"Clayton Cottingham"
<drfrog@telus.net> Sent by: owner-www-vrml@web3d.org
RE: [www-vrml] Tim BL Is
Baffled, Too Looooooonnnngggggg
its times like this im glad i
did just re-read neuromancer...that i can walk through the same city as
william gibson and envision that 'possbile' direction...that i can calmly
sit down and pick up the copy of marc pesce's vrml:browsing and building
cyberspace (1995) ... coincedentally with Tim BL's foreward {OCR is wonderful
see attached}
this is a very different tone
in this foreward, talking about the same subject, as opposed to this threads
article
I'm glad i can recall passionate
discussions with all of you, nothing ever personal , although things do
get heated {len are you on crack :P)...first and foremost in my mind was
the vision of VR...my feeling then as it is now is that vrml/x3d is the
conduit for this
i recall sending tony a thank
you / congratulations on making his worldview vrml1 and vrml2 browsers....viewing
the first world and of course building my first world
this stuff is important to me...
it is with unbridled passion that i make my remarks
and as i said to my friend last
night when thinking about it all:
'its easier to point to the problems
than it is to find solutions'
im going to address the questions
neil asks and then keep rambling
so the one question is
how do you engage the community
the other is
what does the consortium need
to do to improve
engaging the community is as easy
as allowing them to have access...
case in point is the browser work
group
i dont know whom else to say championed
the idea more than me that they were gonna sit down and talk ..gleeful
you bet!
little did i realize it was going
to be behind close doors, with no forum for us vermin to help/aid in that
process
all that energy ended up accomplishing
what? not even a percentile of interoperability , a let down? you bet!
engage the community? back in
the day workgroups were fine to just join and help......
i was very interested in helping
with the db workgroup until it started being controlled by oracles way
of interfacing.. no clear consensus or forethought about how this was going
to work with any other database...let alone operating system
engage the community indeed...we
are still here, regardless of the consortium... who here would stop programming
vrml/x3d if the consortium failed tomorrow? none of us! And thats something
you should think hard about....the consortium exists amongst us... not
above
what does the consortium need
to do to improve......?
seriously i think its a dead end..
i really am begining to think VRML would have been better served by being
a part of the w3c consortium
I dont understand the intimate
financial details of the consortium, but every point you make neil seems
to have the taint of fiscal responsibility all over it
i really dont see how there is
this big need for money to make this work, we were fine before , what has
changed?
other organizations seem to be
doing fine, so look at what works ,there are tonnes of workable models
to choose from, from open source to non-profits
I have constantly said that the
consortium need to watch dog the companies for proper usage, spec interpretation,
deployment and interoperabiity..they the consortium needs a reference browser/plugin
for vrml or x3d, much like w3c has for html
i have constantly said that better
marketing is needed, we have to educate the market, we need 3d on web3d.org
for a site dealing with 3d online...
it seems pretty funny there isnt a lick of it on the site
thats considered bad marketing
:|
ok i dont want this to be taken
hard ..its so far gone it spilt milk to me but i want you all to think
about this and see what you think about this
when i made that perl script that
used don brutzmans xslts and was able to generate vrml output from x3d
when a x3d browser wasnt available yet i was asked by the consortium if
they could put it on the site
cool stuff...right ?anybody would
be overjoyed? sure as shootin i sure was
so yeah its up there in the membership
area... no one can see or use it unless you have a membership
suddenly im cut off and obviously
a lil disgruntled
yes sometimes things seem a bit
personal....
so over and over again i have
seen example after example of bad treatment to the community at large by
the consortium, and
these are just off the top of
my head
Bafflement:
interoperability is inextricably
linked to deployment issues
if people get fed up with setting
something up they go away, and usually dont return
how many times have i missed out
on a contract b/c i couldnt get a plugin to install and work?
anyone else????
the chasm you refer to is smaller
than you think
i know lots of vermin are creating
worlds for scientific and medical use...the gap isnt that big and its continually
shrinking
regarding membership:
I dont see the need for me to
make membership, what use will it give me?
i dont see it, I guess the only
reason would be to put my money where my mouth is and run for a position
on the BoD
:D:D:D
as purely a developer though,
i dont see the need to do this..
as an html developer i dont see
the need to join the w3c right?
sure, if i want to submit a proposal
yeah i do.....but i am here to find solutions to programming vrml/x3d
more and more often these solutions
are market and financially driven.. not driven by the force of vr itself,
sad isnt it?
Neil, you look forward with hope
.. you hope someone somewhere will make this happen.
Neil, as the president of the
web3d consortium it falls to you to provide some sort of leadership in
this area
the point is that the consortium
should be helping us get there, im fighting for it constantly, as should
be obvious by now, and believe me its also with fasination and disappointment
these thing cycle around to the same issues
why is that? do we need an organizational
pschyologist?
why is it the visionaries and
leader of vrml past have left?
a lot of bad blood was spilt on
the specs and it has tainted them
we all seem to know the fuzzy
reasons why they left its got to do with vision verses money...and that
is a sad legacy
but thats ancient history
ok gotta cacth up to thread
ok i gotta catch up on the thread
now!
[attachment "foreward.txt" deleted by
Neil TREVETT/US/3DLabs/Creative]
ForwardSourceID:NT00024F4A