RE: Why XML for Messaging?
We do. See X3D (flux or xj3d). A 2D component can also fit inside a 3D layout and/or be a layer in the 3D objects. Pete sent the XMSF link at the Moves Institute. This and XSBC are companions to X3D. Navigating 3D with a joystick is quite easy. Even then, you overrate the difficulty. I watch kids do this with their keyboards all the time without much effort. There are still areas to be worked betted in selecting say areas of objects, but it is a common practice issue. As to the concepts of gestures, this is a very fertile field. Note that just as with searching and selecting in other domains, human gestures are subject to ambiguity and that is one of the areas where efforts such as HumanML ventured into but didn't get much traction. Distractions.... but the concepts are all there and the technology to implement them given XML is cheap and abundant. No, the real problems are the desktop gorillas and the tyranny of QBE. Then there are the SVGNazis for whom I have sympathy but not much respect. (Flame away, guys, but you can't see the future for the fog...). I agree about rich clients and servers otherwise, but SMOP. What is interesting is that despite punditry, folks are making progress in all of these areas without being in bigCos. len From: Didier PH Martin [mailto:martind@n...] Didier: Its even worse, we do not actually have common rich apps defined from XML and running on clients. We are still trapped in the mainframe world. A 3D component can fit into a 2D layout form. Since our screens are 2D and based on virtual screens (i.e. windows) then then 3D components can be embedded into 2D layouts (may even take the entire screen). Moreover, this 3D component can be collaborative and trigger events to be used by other components. The simulation and game clients are rich, use messaging, and transfer objects. Distributed systems such as XMSF are already doing much of this. The Blaxxun SharedEvents extension is already doing this. Didier: I tried googling for XMSF but got a lot of garbage. Any link? The language of the next generation is the language of the *viewpoint* (not a philosophical viewpoint: a virtual camera++). Thus, not XAML or XUL. Didier: Maybe Len, but we are still in the dark ages. To move to new UI paradigms we need a renaissance.... XAML and XUL or any other framework allowing us to use the processing power of clients in a necessary step. Don't forget that we seriously regressed on that front in the last years. Another point, my numerous hours in the usability lab taught me that unless we have better input devices. Navigating in 3D is really not easy with a mouse. Maybe we need a new device like a glove and a gesture language. Or even better a sensor able to recognize the gesture. Games will probably be the first to use such devices. But games like applications are expensive to install on each and every workstation in a company. Here us what we need: a) Software that can be downloaded from the web without any installation costs. Centrally delivered and automatically delivered from there. b) Software using the local processing power. Servers should be common data storage not application processors. Speaking and hearing with our community lead me to observe that the current state of the art is: a) applications running on servers, b) clients reduced to the role of terminals and like one of our colleague said in this group. We do this in color and animations. Small improvement over 3270 terminals :-) We need to bring rich apps with reduced cost of ownership to users. Then, from there progress will resume. We regressed for the "reach" with "poorer" applications. We now need to keep the "reach" with "richer" applications.
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format