Re: TPAC meeting minutes 1 NOV 2011, annotated with links

Hi Kristian, (please forward to public-declarative3d@w3.org if needed since I am not a member yet)

Thanks for adding me to the loop.

One thing I wanted to bring your attention to is the 'transform-style' property in the CSS 3D transform spec:

http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-3d-transforms/#transform-style-property

Kind regards,
Vincent

On Nov 2, 2011, at 6:54 AM, Kristian Sons wrote:

> [added Vincent and Neil in CC]
> 
> Thanks Don for taking the minutes of our CG meeting yesterday.
> 
> Let me go further in detail about the discussion we had with Vincent:
> 
> Vincent raised the question, why not to transform the HTML rendering 
> from discreet layering to a real spatial rendering. We had this 
> discussion during Web3D 2009 in Darmstadt, but gave up this idea quickly 
> because it seemed to far away from anything doable in mid-term.
> 
> But with the transformation of compositing from software to GPU, 
> performing a orthogonal projection of the layers in 3D space, the idea 
> appears no longer that bizarre.
> 
> I don't want to say: Let's force this evolution. It's hard enough for us 
> to find (browser vendor) friends with the idea to include a 3D rendering 
> engine into the Browser :) But this silent evolution might play into our 
> hands as the HTML rendering engine includes more and more 3D techniques.
> 
> Just imagine what a real depth system could bring:
> - 3D Objects could cast shadows on a web page (or shadows between layers)
> - Objects could go through a web page
> - A real lighting system also for 2D
> - Depth of field
> 
> The Tilt project goes a little in this direction. Still discreet 
> one-per-object depths, but it's easy to imagine to break that.
> 
> Sure, there are many problems to be solved, especially perspective 
> projection will not help reading text.
> 
> Coming back from these visions, we also had some very concrete 
> discussions. Vincent told us about efforts to merge the CSS 3D 
> transforms and transformations in SVG which will also influence the used 
> Base Types (CSSMatrix, SVGMatrix). Vicent said it would be nice if we 
> participate and bring in our knowledge and requirements.
> 
> This seems to be a promising start to coordinate our efforts with 
> efforts in current W3C WGs.
> 
> Best regards,
>   Kristian
> 
> 
> Am 01.11.2011 23:38, schrieb Don Brutzman:
>> added links, now that networking is available
>> 
>> On 11/1/2011 1:52 PM, Don Brutzman wrote:
>>> [...]
>>> 2.  We asked about the W3C AR community group.  There was no meeting
>>> for this group at TPAC, and the mailing list has been silent for
>>> about 2 months.  Not sure if they are still active.
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/community/ar/
>> 
>> no wiki page found
>> 
>>> Discussion question:  shouldn't this group have an AR use case?
>>> We all agreed this was valuable to express as part of Declarative 3D.
>>> We can distill our use cases from descriptions available on that site,
>> 
>> none found
>> 
>>> from the recent AR Standards Group meeting, from the new ISO SC24
>>> working group 9, and from the X3D AR working group.
>> 
>> X3D AR working group:
>> http://www.web3d.org/realtime-3d/augmented-reality-ar
>> 
>> ISO JTC 1/SC 24
>> http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_technical_committee?commid=45252
>> slideset
>> http://www.perey.com/ARStandards/%5BKim%5DISO_SC24_Status-Slides.pdf
>> 
>>> Anita gave us a summary report of the just-completed AR Standards Group
>>> 2-day meeting, 15 people attended.  We discussed various standards
>>> alignment possibilities.
>> 
>> http://www.perey.com/ARStandards/
>> 
>>> 3.  Process suggestion:  declarative 3d community group teleconference
>>> efforts probably ought to start using tools available to all W3C
>>> working groups:
>>> - IRC chat, scribing, and web logging for meeting minutes
>> 
>> Details
>> http://www.w3.org/Project/IRC/
>> 
>> irc://irc.w3.org:6665/#declarative3d
>> or
>> http://irc.w3.org/#declarative3d
>> 
>>> - Action items list and issues list
>>> 
>>> 4.  Discussed agenda for Wednesday afternoon breakout session.  Reviewed
>>> and discussed the Declarative 3D Community Group slideset in complete
>>> detail.  Kristian and Johannes presented a large and quite-impressive
>>> series of demos.
>> 
>> http://www.xml3d.org
>> 
>> http://www.x3dom.org
>> 
>>> Considered current issues and past lessons learned
>>> in other W3C standards.
>> 
>> Recommended reading:  Tim Berners-Lee, _Weaving the Web_
>> http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/Weaving/Overview.html
>> 
>>> 5.  Vincent provided a short summary of SVG filter effects as a way
>>> to predictably offer underlying shader capabilities to SVG authors.
>>> We talked at length about the effects work going on in CSS, he gave
>>> a demo showing lots of impressive capabilities, and we discussed
>>> some CSS/shader technical challenges where a 3D approach can help.
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/filters.html
>> 
>> He also mentioned CSS Regions and CSS Exclusions:
>> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-regions
>> http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-exclusions
>> 
>>> 6.  Neil discussed rationale for a 3D transmission format.  At some
>>> point, 3D assets need to go across the network and it might be a
>>> valuable addition to ecosystem to have a format for 3D analagous
>>> to JPEG for imagery, MP3 for audio, H264/MPEG4 for video, etc.
>>> Alternative is that browsers have to do decoding in javascript
>>> or content doesn't work.  Seems like an obvious hole.  Could do
>>> an inventory of available work, discuss possibilities with MPEG etc.
>>> Progressive streaming and compression would be primary benefits.
>>> 
>>> Interesting discussion (once again).
>> 
>> A future teleconference will be setup to discuss further
>> for those who are interested.
>> 
>>> ======================================
>>> Here are things we didn't discuss yet.
>>> 
>>> 7.  Requests for W3C
>>> - (Need to confirm) community group support for IRC chat, trackers
>> 
>> confirmed available, links above
>> 
>>> - Occasional team review, feedback regarding goals and activities
>>> 
>>> 8.  Areas where declarative 3D is very different from other media,
>>> languages and web standards.  Rationale: establishing W3C Recommendation
>>> for Declarative 3D should add new capabilities to the Web.  Undesired
>>> alternative:  W3C members unconvinced that new work adds value.
>>> 
>>> - User-driven navigation in and around 3D models
>>> - User-driven interaction:  selection, picking, collision detection
>>> - Reuse and composition of individual 3D models into larger worlds
>>> - Full integration of 3D models with HTML5 content by Web authors,
>>> 	allowing 2-way exchange of events via DOM
>>> - Augmented Reality (AR) with user control of 3D display space,
>>> 	not simply 2D overlays on top of video feed
>>> - Embeddable physics
>>> -
>>> -
>>> - no doubt several others...
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 9.  We need to characterize shared relationships (+) and distinguishing
>>> differences (-) between Declarative 3D goals and other W3C technologies.
>>> 
>>> + integratable with HTML, as external or embedded page object
>>> - different than SVG, native 3D representations essential, though many
>>> 	lessons of SVG design are relevant
>>> - different than canvas: not low-level shader programming
>>> + DOM representation central to capture 3D scene graph.  Holding data
>>> 	structures in real time is now satisfactory with high-performance
>>> 	DOM implementations.
>>> + DOM event model is dissimilar to typical event-passing paradigm of
>>> 	most 3D scene graphs, but can be aligned
>>> + HTML5 interaction model needs to be utilized, e.g. HTML DOM level 2
>>> 	mouse events
>>> + Significant level of CSS capabilities can be utilized, possibly
>>> 	align HTML colors with 3D materials
>>> - Need consistent accessibility so that navigation and usability is
>>> 	intuitive/predictable (rather than "lost is space")
>>> 
>>> Additional potential relationships with W3C Recommendations:
>>> + Most base types supported in XML Schema - add n-tuple arrays?
>>> ? Multimedia synchronization - other requirements beyond HTML5?
>>> ? XPath and XSLT support needed, possible?
>>> ? MathML support for equations?
>>> ? SVG, movie, canvas support for creating embedded texture images?
>>> 
>>> One way to get completely confounded would be if we cherry-picked
>>> pieces and parts of W3C Recommendations.  Instead we should accept
>>> specific requirements and interoperability to align Declarative 3D
>>> compatibly with Open Web Platform.
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/wiki/Open_Web_Platform
>> 
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Web_Platform
>> 
>>> 10.  Use cases and requirements.  Needs work.  What's the plan?
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/community/declarative3d/wiki/Use_Cases_and_Requirements
>> http://www.w3.org/community/declarative3d/wiki/Requirement_Building_Blocks
>> 
>> all the best, Don
> 
> 
> -- 
> ________________________________________________________
> 
> Kristian Sons
> Deutsches Forschungszentrum für Künstliche Intelligenz GmbH, DFKI
> Agenten und Simulierte Realität
> Campus, Geb. D 3 2, Raum 0.77
> 66123 Saarbrücken, Germany
> 
> Phone: +49 681 85775-3833
> Phone: +49 681 302-3833
> Fax:   +49 681 85775–2235
> kristian.sons@dfki.de
> http://www.xml3d.org
> 
> Geschäftsführung: Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Wolfgang Wahlster (Vorsitzender)
> Dr. Walter Olthoff
> 
> Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes
> Amtsgericht Kaiserslautern, HRB 2313
> ________________________________________________________

Received on Thursday, 3 November 2011 17:53:09 UTC