|
From: Braden M. <br...@en...> - 2001-06-08 03:16:25
|
On Thu, 7 Jun 2001, John Richardson wrote: > My suggestion would be to provide the models to the Web3D consortium. They > can be advertised to "work" with certain versions of openvrml on certain > platforms. The consortium probably has the bandwidth to store and > distribute. I'm not sure if you're recommending this for the VRSpace project or OpenVRML. As far as OpenVRML is concerned, the models in our distribution will be less for validation of conformance and more for just showing off. Where possible, I'd prefer to leave test construction to the folks at NIST and the Web3D Consortium. But where they can't (or at least aren't at all likely to) help us is with validating our API. To that end, it would be nice to have some unit testing going on, but that might be too much to hope for. OpenVRML is not a Web3D Consortium product, and for our purposes I think SourceForge provides more than adequate resources. Also, the Consortium already has the PROTO Repository and Universal Media--I'm not sure how keen they'd be on another model repository. Not that my opinion on the issue is at all pertinent--if someone sees a good idea here and is serious about it, by all means make a proposal to the Consortium. But the OpenVRML project is tasked with producing a VRML library and browser--not with maintaining model repositories or certifying content. > Also, when a certain level of satisfaction with the distribution is > reached, prebuilt executables or even a source distribution can be built > and then offered to distribution outlets such as MacAddict, MacFormat, PC > world as freeware to be distributed along with their magazines. British > magazines love to give away tons of freeware. That is definitely a possibility. In fact, we have open tasks on creating Mac and Windows binary distributions; these are up for grabs by anyone who'd like to volunteer. -- Braden McDaniel e-mail: <br...@en...> <http://endoframe.com> Jabber: <br...@ja...> |