[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[www-vrml] Re: [x3d-public] ' X3D is still too complicated but ...'



I see. Well, I'm sure it will all come down to particular implementations,
and hardware keeps getting 'wider', so spec'ing to current hardware is
a dicey proposition.

John A. Stewart wrote:
Dave;

I think that what Tony was referring to was not functionality, but total sizes
for memory footprint. eg (not having the spec in front of me) if the spec says
"requires 100,000 Group nodes" - this might be a non-starter for limited
RAM systems.


There were some neat handheld demos at the web3d Conference last week.

On 25-Apr-06, at 2:53 PM, Dave A wrote:

You should also look at what other 3D frameworks are providing for on small devices.
GDC was showing off a lot of phone/small game devices. They do more than 'examine mode
on a static object'. Played Quake on a cell phone.


Tony Parisi wrote:
Hi everyone,
I think the only difference we might consider between Interactive and Tiny are
the file size limitations. We should look at the footprints of the targeted
devices and see if they can handle the limits currently set in the Interactive
profile.

----------------------------------------------------------- John A. Stewart alex.stewart@crc.ca

Network Systems and Technologies -
        Systemes et technologies des reseaux
Communications Research Centre Canada  |
         Centre de recherches sur les communications Canada

3701 Carling Ave.  |  3701, avenue Carling
PO Box 11490, Station H  |  CP 11490, succursale H
         Ottawa ON K2H 8S2   |  Ottawa (Ontario) K2H 8S2

http://www.crc.ca





-------------------------------------------------------------------------
for list subscription/unsubscription,
go to http://www.web3d.org/cgi-bin/public_list_signup/lwgate/listsavail.html