Web3D Consortium at Engage

[Damon Hernandez]

Web3D Consortium will showcase innovative web3D tech at Engage 2009 from some of their amazing members. Stop by! http://bit.ly/15nzb4

[Bruce Lehmann]

Looks awesome, wish I could be there.

[Steve]

I am sure this will be very imformative but it confuses me a bit to see the consortium talking about open standards and MU platforms, while in the same breath say that they are demonstrating this technology using BM Collabrate and IPhone. Does it seems perhaps that open standards is forming a partnership with commercial enterprise? I just wish that the Consortium would spend a bit more time trying to make X3D accessible to the masses by means of decent conversion software rather than "promoting" it via the implimentation of "non-free", "non-open source" partners. It's all well and good but sure seems more like an advertisement for businesses to me rather than an open source effort for the 3D community at large.

Perhaps some day more commercial software developers will begin to support X3D. Then maybe it will truly become more accessible.

[fabricator]

Steve said:

I am sure this will be very imformative but it confuses me a bit to see the consortium talking about open standards and MU platforms.

I'm even more puzzled by the statement on the front page on the web3d consortium website.
It states "...standards for Avatar Standardization (H-Anim) and Multi-user Shared State (Network Sensor Node)"

H-Anim does not equal an Avatar, as it still lacks the control system (movement, name, animation) required for a usable avatar. The Network Sensor node isn't a complete Shared State solution either, as it doesn't deal with issues of interlocks, persistence, access control. Sure you can add all these things with scripts, but that then makes content harder to write, and makes content behave differently on server platforms.

Obviously the web3d consortium are trying to nail down a standard for multiuser x3d. The problem I have is how the consortium is structured, you pay fees to join and proposals are discussed in secret, there is no funding available for research. The end result is that companies basically get their projects made into standards, so they get the first product for sale.

The huge costs for companies to join and vote, means that most content developers (as in World Builders) can't afford to get involved. Its $1,500 just for an individual to get voting rights, much more for companies. No one is going to spend that sort of money unless they get something back.

Bitmanagement do some great work in improving vrml/x3d standards in a practical way. I'm just not so sure about the motivation behind some other companies.

[Damon Hernandez]

Interesting thoughts expressed here.

From what I understood of the Consortium's involvement in the Expo, it was to share with people in the virtual worlds space X3D. You all would not believe how ignorant a good chunk of these 'virtual world savvy' people there were to the standards that have been around so long. A visitor to the booth actually said, " We work with the web3d open standards (meaning Consortium), all our stuff is in Flash!" I personally think it was smart to mention the work that has so far been done on avatar standardization (H-Anim) and multi-user shared state (Network Sensor Node) as these are the areas of interest to the audience at the event. A great lure to hopefully pull in those interested in these areas to further their development by showing off current commercial applications.

As a worker of the booth, I assure you that open source players were mentioned just as much (if not more) to people and yes, commercial members were referenced when someone asked, "who is making money with this?" We shared the great work of as many members, commercial and non, as possible. I even mentioned this group to several people who asked if there is an active community for X3D. For future events, I hope more from this community contribute some of the great work that is done here every now and then to help others see the positive results of standards.

I agree that the fee for voting membership is high, but there are many ways I feel we in the community can contribute. I am constantly amazed by the things I see developed here. The results of individual's passions, interests, and collaboration in the form of exporters, MU servers, content, code,etc.

I commend members of the Web3DC's Board that have taken proactive action on certain wants and interests the community of hardcore developers (you all+) have expressed. I have witnessed more than you will hear of those at the Board level volunteering their time and personal costs to make alliances, represent the standard at events, and spend massive bandwidth to push the technology we all believe in ways beyond what the mandate states. So when the call goes out by the Consortium for content to demonstrate, use to flex the X3D muscle, I hope to see some of this group's members great work there. Free advertising right? Doesn't hurt. I think we all know that compelling content and applications are the things needed that will get more tools to adopt.

With that being said, I also agree that X3D needs to be made more accessible to the masses by means of decent conversion software and good tools that support it. There are several tools (existing/dev) that I know of that will be adopting X3D here soon that will take it deeper into markets of light penetration. Very exciting times these are, but one more than ever where we need to work together. I assure you that the collaboration will bring the future to the masses and go far beyond anything that will ever be shown at this event.

IMHO

[Steve]

There was a time when the consortium was all about open standards for 3D on the web and to ensure that the standard was accessible to everyone regardless of $tatus. Today it seems that unless there is a dollar sign attached, noone is interested in implimenting a standard. If companies find a use for 3D then there is a market but the artistic and entertainment community is left out in the cold in this (new standard). VRML is still much more accessible and user friendly than x3d and anyone can still use it despite the fact that it is no longer officially the standard. Content creators can export their designs as VRML2 and use it immediately but trying to convert large quantities of data to x3dv is problematic at best.

If the consortium truly desires to make the x3d standard accessible and more widely used they should get back to grass roots and truly make it accessible for everyone. Then and only then will you start to see much richer content developed for x3d. As it stands now, VRML is much easier to impliment, fewer problems and much less headaches than trying to convert thier work over to to this new standard. Mesh conversion, scripting conversion, PROTO conversion, extension nodes...... All of these things beg for attention but unless someone has money to pay this will not happen.

The beauty of VRML and an open standard was that anyone on the web could partake of it. In this new standard only those with money to "donate" can get any sort of action. Either the consortium is going to become a privatized venture in which it caters to those who pay them or it is going to revert to serving the 3D community at large. It is pretty hard to serve both but I try to keep an eye on what they are doing in case one day they decide to bring x3d to the community and out from behind closed doors. Until that day I am sure I will use the "old" standard because of it's accessibility and user friendly attributes. I see a much greater % of "new" content being created for VRML than for x3d. There has to be some logic involved with the decision to use old over new.

[fabricator]

Damon Hernandez said:

I agree that the fee for voting membership is high, but there are many ways I feel we in the community can contribute. I am constantly amazed by the things I see developed here. The results of individual's passions, interests, and collaboration in the form of exporters, MU servers, content, code,etc.

The point is we here don't have to pay money to develop, unless we want to. But in order to submit it to the x3d spec you have to pay to join, and to prevent your proposed standard from being mucked with you have to have voting rights.

Most of the people here wouldn't spend $1500 on this sort of thing, when they have more urgent needs. Unless your doing it as a business in which case you can claim it all on tax anyway.

The Consortium website just isn't set up for content, there is not gallery, nor if the front page a graphical display of showcase worlds. It looks and reads like, a 1980's news paper.

Damon Hernandez said:

So when the call goes out by the Consortium for content to demonstrate, use to flex the X3D muscle, I hope to see some of this group's members great work there. Free advertising right? Doesn't hurt. I think we all know that compelling content and applications are the things needed that will get more tools to adopt.

They have never ever asked for content, a few odd requests for examples for nodes that need it is all.

After the debacle at Sigraph, where I was promised 10 minutes, then 5 minutes, then nothing! All because the person running the presentation couldn't setup Skype, BS Contact and some basic remote desktop system. I stayed up till 4am for nothing.

If the Consortium want to present something of mine in the future, I expect to get 20 minutes, and to get paid for my time. I'm not going to get mucked around again, people just don't respect anything that is free. Last time I looked you still needed to be a member to display content at their display, something about they can't pass on your contact details unless your a member.

That we need a 'showcase' just proves that the website has failed at providing content. Why is there no online showcase instead ?