Re: Standardized Application Level Information in VRML files

[Reed Whittington <reedwhit@airmail.net>]

> 
> As for a standardised way of doing this, I tend to agree with Vladimir that
> it may not be possible to find a completely generic way of representing
> arbitrary application-level data - it is after all specific to a particular
> application package or area and may not be of relevance out with that
> domain. In our case, Lee Iverson here has recently started the GeoVRML
> Working Group which aims to look at how we can incorporate geo-referenced or
> cartographic models into VRML in a standardised way so that people working
> in the area and using VRML will be able to interchange data.
> 

I don't agree.  I think there can be a universal,
standard way to identify parts and entities.

FACC does this for geographic features.  
UPC does this for domestic products.

These are separate standards that have their own control
board.

I believe the VRML community should try to find a place in VRML
to put in classification TAGS and associated attributes that
would allow a standard parts identification system,
like FACC or UPC, to exist inside the VRML standard.



-- 
| Reed Whittington                   office:(972) 308-8500 fax: 8502
| Coryphaeus Software, Inc.            home:(214) 363-4745
| Principal Software Engineer        mailto:reedwhit@coryphaeus.com
| Data Translation/Integration Group   http://www.coryphaeus.com