[vos-d] status and scheming

[Reed Hedges]

Peter Amstutz wrote:
> reflecting the reflection system.  

Just checking-- not a typo is it? :)


> 
> -) Once that is done I will have a choice.  Either a) continue working 
> on backend stuff, such as implementing networking, persistance and 
> caching components, or b) take the capabilities of the basic kernel and 
> (hopefully) scripting bindings and work towards piecing together the 
> next generation of the browser application (it might be time to retire 
> the name Ter'Angreal, as well ... it confuses people).  Now, this is a 
> difficult decision.  On the one hand, VOS without the ne


How hard would it be to add networking?  It's pretty essential to the 
project, it's the main reason to use VOS in the first place to do 
anything.  Even if the "demo" browser doesn't really use it, it needs to 
be implemented in VOS (at least in part) so we can start updating 
existing apps and people can start/continue working on stuff for 
multiuser worlds.   We can split terangreal into two apps, "gamedemo" 
which is local but scriptable, and another one which is like current 
terangreal -- no local scripting (yet), but focused on talking and 
remote editing.   We'd also add "scripting" to omnivos as well I'd think.

Making "gamedemo" is a good idea, but I wouldn't completely skip over 
networking unless you think it will take a long time and you want to 
make something that really excercises and demonstrates new s5 features 
first.

 > (Although conversely, designing the 3D app without a network could also
 > be dangerous).

Well actually it could also help, if we keep networking in mind and 
design it carefully :)




> [Time and revision control]
> I wonder if the two 
> concepts could be merged somehow?  


This is a running theme in VOS development-- taking two concepts from 
different domains and trying to merge them a bit (i.e. like code-reuse). 
  At least I'm always trying to do thought experiments along these 
lines. And it's hard to come up with a future-proof way of doing it :) 
But it's doable maybe.


Wouldn't it be neat if you you could
> dial back to the state of any data the same way as you move an animation 
> slider?
> 
> I'm pretty far from deciding at all how this would work, but it is 
> certain that we need a time parameter for animation, so it is worth 
> exploring fully the potential benefit of introducing a deep concept of 
> (relative!) time into VOS.
> 
> (** lalo mentioned that if you had an animation that was also in version 
> control, that data would have *multiple* time dimensions.  We could then 
> advertise VOS as a 5-dimensional virtual world.  This makes my head 
> hurt.)
> 
> Comments?
> 
> [   Peter Amstutz  ][ tetron at interreality.org ][ peter.amstutz at gdit.com ]
> [Lead Programmer][Interreality Project][Virtual Reality for the Internet]
> [ VOS: Next Generation Internet Communication][ http://interreality.org ]
> [ http://interreality.org/~tetron ][ pgpkey:  pgpkeys.mit.edu  18C21DF7 ]
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> vos-d mailing list
> vos-d at interreality.org
> http://www.interreality.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vos-d