RE: request for guidance: centralized extensibility for HTML5 using X3D graphics

So you are requesting the HTML5 mandate (or at least recommend) WebGL as a standard technology?  Or that the X3DDOM be a standard part of the HTML5 DOM?

I guess I don't understand exactly what you are asking of this working group.

Leonard

-----Original Message-----
From: public-html-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Chris Marrin
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 5:04 PM
To: public-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: request for guidance: centralized extensibility for HTML5 using X3D graphics


On Feb 23, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Krzysztof Maczyński wrote:

> Chris,
> 
>> GeoNodes, metadata, and even all the primitives (Box, Sphere, etc.) could be easily done in a JavaScript library and kept out of the core node set. There would also be no need for TimeSensors or other timing or animation related nodes. You could also eliminate the complexity of Prototypes, which can be done in a JavaScript library.
> Your point of view doesn't generalize beyond scripting-centricity. Standard arguments about declarative approaches being superior under many circumstances, especially in markup, apply here.


I'm not sure what you mean by that statement. Advocating the use of scripts to extend a given set of functionality (like 3D) is not at odds with a declarative approach. X3DOM is proof of that. The question is what needs to be hardcoded into the browser. I think WebGL is a great first pass at what is needed. Any further steps have to be done with a minimalist approach or they will never gain any traction. The main point of my statements was that you don't need to give up functionality because of that minimalist approach.

-----
~Chris
cmarrin@apple.com

Received on Wednesday, 24 February 2010 00:04:42 UTC