From miguelg at tid.es Tue Apr 27 06:16:05 2004 From: miguelg at tid.es (Miguel Guzman Miranda) Date: Tue Apr 27 06:26:31 2004 Subject: [WF-Protocols] Open Model Format development frozen Message-ID: <1083071764.1853.25.camel@fenris> Hello there, This mail will not come as a surprise to anyone on this list. People on cal3d, crystalspace, ogre and blender communities know that, though I haven't mailed to this specific list (instead, to the specific communities forums/lists), I've been coding converters for the Open Model Format that we discussed here (if at a crawling pace due to lack of time). However I am not so sure anymore that our own Open Model Format is the way to go. For one, there is X3D, that we discussed in the list prior to making a new format: http://www.web3d.org/x3d Though we discarded it at first, lately when I became more involved in the scene I've found out that X3D with the "Interchange" profile is more than enough for the goals we set up (interchange between 3D engines in XML format). In fact I've contacted two other persons with are also interested to add X3D support to Free Software projects, and as tripling the workforce is always a good thing, my next goal was to keep doing converters but for X3D instead. But then again, this news item on The Register (spotted on /.) featured a new player in the scene: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/04/21/intel_u3d/ Seems the 3DIF consortium (www.3dif.org) is making their own 3D standard which will, as X3D, be part of ISO. So now, with two official standards (that's the nice thing about standards, that you have so many to choose from), I feel that to keep developing a different one is futile. Personally, I will from now own direct my efforts on making converters for Free Sofware engines / applications, but for either or both of the above mentioned formats, so you'll have to cope with me still ;) Just felt like mailing this (now dead) list was the appropiate way to close this (quicly reaching all the people that once were involved), and perhaps to get some quick comments/suggestions on future standarization efforts, or "what should be done next". Best regards, Aglanor From steve at stevestreeting.com Tue Apr 27 14:23:56 2004 From: steve at stevestreeting.com (Steve Streeting) Date: Tue Apr 27 14:23:49 2004 Subject: [WF-Protocols] Re: Protocols Digest, Vol 5, Issue 1 In-Reply-To: <20040427190209.BCB75134B1F@ice.mudshark.org> References: <20040427190209.BCB75134B1F@ice.mudshark.org> Message-ID: <408ECF6C.9000008@stevestreeting.com> I think this is a very sensible decision Aglanor, putting effort into writing converters for open source engines to/from the standardised formats is definitely the way to go. Best of luck, you know where to find us if you need to discuss :) Cheers Steve www.ogre3d.org protocols-request@mail.worldforge.org wrote: > Send Protocols mailing list submissions to > protocols@mail.worldforge.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://mail.worldforge.org/lists/listinfo/protocols > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > protocols-request@mail.worldforge.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > protocols-owner@mail.worldforge.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Protocols digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Open Model Format development frozen (Miguel Guzman Miranda) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 15:16:05 +0200 > From: Miguel Guzman Miranda > Subject: [WF-Protocols] Open Model Format development frozen > To: protocols@worldforge.org > Cc: media@worldforge.org > Message-ID: <1083071764.1853.25.camel@fenris> > Content-Type: text/plain > > Hello there, > > This mail will not come as a surprise to anyone on this list. People > on cal3d, crystalspace, ogre and blender communities know that, though I > haven't mailed to this specific list (instead, to the specific > communities forums/lists), I've been coding converters for the Open > Model Format that we discussed here (if at a crawling pace due to lack > of time). > > However I am not so sure anymore that our own Open Model Format is the > way to go. For one, there is X3D, that we discussed in the list prior to > making a new format: > > http://www.web3d.org/x3d > > Though we discarded it at first, lately when I became more involved in > the scene I've found out that X3D with the "Interchange" profile is more > than enough for the goals we set up (interchange between 3D engines in > XML format). > > In fact I've contacted two other persons with are also interested to > add X3D support to Free Software projects, and as tripling the workforce > is always a good thing, my next goal was to keep doing converters but > for X3D instead. > > But then again, this news item on The Register (spotted on /.) > featured a new player in the scene: > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/04/21/intel_u3d/ > > Seems the 3DIF consortium (www.3dif.org) is making their own 3D > standard which will, as X3D, be part of ISO. > > So now, with two official standards (that's the nice thing about > standards, that you have so many to choose from), I feel that to keep > developing a different one is futile. > > Personally, I will from now own direct my efforts on making converters > for Free Sofware engines / applications, but for either or both of the > above mentioned formats, so you'll have to cope with me still ;) > > Just felt like mailing this (now dead) list was the appropiate way to > close this (quicly reaching all the people that once were involved), and > perhaps to get some quick comments/suggestions on future standarization > efforts, or "what should be done next". > > Best regards, > > Aglanor > > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Protocols mailing list > Protocols@mail.worldforge.org > http://mail.worldforge.org/lists/listinfo/protocols > > > End of Protocols Digest, Vol 5, Issue 1 > *************************************** > >