[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Re: Approaches to Expanding the Semantics of a Community's
While most of us are familiar with the most common means to achieve interoperable semantics (up-translation, down-translation, common vocabulary), we may not be studying causes of resistance or adoption of interoperable semantics. As usual, here are examples for the web3D community. I find graphics are the acid test of XML design assumptions. O Means exist. No market imperative. For example, there is much talk of interoperable avatars for online worlds. Game makers are highly resistant to this (and to XML in general). They thrive in a to-the-metal market. They also have the shortest life-cycle. O Means exist. Culture resists it. For example, in virtual worlds there still exists the pseudo-early-adopter attitude that 'our world is good BECAUSE it is exclusive'. This is similar to the vendor excuse that complexity is a barrier to competition. It isn't true but it helps amplify early sign up numbers. They may have a long lifecycle (see Cybertown) but interoperability is a tool-to-product issue, not a product-to-product issue. O Means exist. The market drivers are fuzzy. One sees this in emergent markets where the FUD is thick and well-funded. Virtual worlds as social networks have a business model similar to a nightclub or casino-economy. It is better for the owner if the customer comes and stays. On the other hand, conference world markets (virtual conference, meeting rooms, etc.) have a stronger incentive to provide space and communications facilities for pre-existing avatars (branded identities that remain constant through the meeting cycles). Life cycle is medium to long term. This is the sweet spot for standards. O Means exist. The requirements are in conflict. One sees this in the military simulation and serious games markets which includes public safety. The requirement for an efficient simulation that enables different agencies with different virtual assets to come online at varying points in the simulation scenario indisputably means interoperable assets. At the same time, the vendors are mixing up very large world mapping (eg, Google Earth) requirements with the simulation and as the scale of the map increases, the effectiveness of various non-proprietary means is in question (eg, XML). The conflict is most pronounced of course where the costs of the datasets are high and the need for long lifecycle support is being suborned to the efficiency of the simulation. Standards are badly needed here but the FUD factor of the emerging market is very high. This is a caveat emptor market. Proposals for standards for interoperability tend to vary by the emphasis on messaging data (so-called back-end telemetry) vs cost of 3D assets (eg, the portable branded avatar, terrain maps, branded real-world building facades). In a real-world 3D simulation, separating the messaging/telemetry from the in-world messaging (gestures, kinesthesics, etc.) is not straightforward. len This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
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
|