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

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



Hi Kitt;

As a browser developer, agreed that X3D is *huge*.  And it's
getting bigger.

We are developing FreeWRL to be rock-solid-no-frills-just-works
browser. Mainly developing to the Profiles, but with many other nodes
thrown in to the mix. Being conformant to the profiles is the most
important thing, however. (I wear the Chairman, Web3D Conformance
Group, so I had better say that)

Unfortunately, people *love* the fancy demos, even if,
possibly, the underlying browser is as holy as swiss cheese.

So, what do you do? It's a real problem - if you wow them with
demos, you get initial attraction, then rejection when the holes
become apparent; if you show them a rock solid browser with
no fancy demos; you don't get that initial attention.

We had the "wow - great demos" voice come up earlier today, from
one of "our" people - so it is a natural reaction.

I don't know the answer.

On 25-Apr-06, at 1:02 PM, Kitt Mason wrote:

 
' X3D is still too complicated but ...'
 
Please don't groan like that ...  It's some time since I raised this!
 
If X3D is to become ubiquitous, accessible to 'one man and his Dreamweaver 8',
is there a place for X3D-Lite ?  'Yes, yes,' I realise that first it's necessary to
establish X3D-Strict , but will it be more or less accessible than Cosmology? 
 

-----------------------------------------------------------
John A. Stewart

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