veenu@mtfmi.att.com (Veenu R Rashid) (09/08/90)
In article <LOKI.90Sep4204822@marvin.moncam.uucp>, moncam!loki@relay.EU.net (Nev er Kid A Kidder) writes: > broehl@watserv1.waterloo.edu (Bernie Roehl) writes: > > > One issue that I'd like to hear discussed is that of protocols. Even for > > the simple system described above, it would be nice to have a standard > > way of passing information back and forth. > > Do the already existing implementations use a well defined, extensible > object representation that they are prepared to publish for the > benefit of all, or are they all closed systems? If someone's already > done it and it's extensible, we may as well use it. If not, here is > my thre'pence ha'p'ney. [a lot of cogent and useful conceptual ideas deleted..] > Looking at this, I'm inclined to think that a lot of it must have > already been thrashed out by X people or Mac people. I wouldn't hold my breath wating. While a lot of the ideas behind object representation in multimedia space have been developed by the Mac people, any implementation on the Mac would be severely limited by its architecture. The high cost of workstations prohibit them from widespread use, except as specialized platforms. A compromise can be reached, however, within the limits of existing hardware and price/performance ratios. Amiga computers are already capable of some aspects of virtual world synthesis. It has a well-documented multimedia environment along with the bandwidth/processor power to implement one with a facsimile of real-time response. (X-Windows !!?! Real-time?? Get serious.) With the addition of a mass-market peripheral such as X-Specs 3D it is possible to implement a 3D viewing environment with little effort. The advent of the Dataglove has produced third-party suppliers to provide the necessary interface at an affordable cost. The prototypical virtual-reality system which I'd like to develop would interface the Dataglove to manipulate data in n-space which could be viewed within 3-dimensions with an XSpecs3D system. Connections with other virtual-reality systems could be achieved after the demonstration of a single system which would take care of virtual reality needs. > > > So, anyone for designing a protocol? The key is, of course, extensibility . > A protocol would be necessary for the description of data in n-space. Further additions would include manipulation capabilities in abstract space. This subsystem would accept input directly from the dataglove, mouse, keyboard, whatever. The represention of the data could be projected on either 2 or 3 dimensions depending on whether the user chooses to buy an XSpecs3D or not. (However for the main purpose of implementation, I would like to assume all users would be using a 3D viewing system of some kind.) The data can be moved around to show different aspects to the user. Preferably individual applications could be geared toward using a high-level language for data specification, while the rendering and display would be performed using the VR system based on a simple protocol. This would speed up any future implementations based on communication. Such a system is capable of being implemented today. Specifically, I plan to use the Amiga system as a platform to implement a version of a sample virtual-reality environment. Faster platforms such as workstations have an advantage in terms of speed and power, but suffer from lack of availability and high cost of expansion (peripherals). I would be interested in hearing from Amiga programmers/hackers who would be interested in working on such an application. > Well, it's a bit naff, but perhaps someone can give some constructive > criticism of it... > -- > Harry Fearnhamm, ,---.'\ EMAIL: loki@moncam.uucp > Monotype ADG, (, /@ )/ ...!ukc!acorn!moncam!loki > Science Park, /( _/ ') VOICE: +44 (0)223 420018 > Cambridge, \,`---' FAX: +44 (0)223 420911 > CB4 4FQ, DISCLAIMER: Nothing is True. > ENGLAND. Everything is Permitted. Ruze AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel, NJ mail: veenu@mtfmi.att.com home: (201) 219-1848
jgsmith@BCM.TMC.EDU (James G. Smith) (09/14/90)
I don't know how many of you are aware of MUD's (Multi-user-dungeons), but they've been around a little while, and they are the first use of multi-user VR's that I've seen (besides games). I just recently "discovered" them, so I'm not an expert (read: don't ask me technical questions), but MUD's actually do several of the things which have been talked about recently in this newsgroup . The interface (for the present) is text. So when you enter a room you get a text description of the room and a mention of objects in the room. When you "look" at an object, you get a longer description of that object (one written by the person who created that object.) It's all very fascinating, especially when comparing Vinge's book (True Names ...) with what's actually happening. My main question is did Vinge know about MUD's or did those who designed MUD's know about Vinge? *