X3D is more than just about images. (I associate "image" with something static, that doesn't move.) If you exceed the "Interchange" profile, you can have:
.. o animations (key frame animations),
.. o interactivity (click on objects, move objects, move the camera) and
.. o scripting
..... oo little inline JavaScripts
..... oo an iinterface for external applications
......... -> consider the X3D viewer as a high-high-high-level render engine).
This is why, as we want to separate datas, graphics, and interactivity, we have designed Alpharis for using X3D only on the Graphic part and don't use interactivity and scripting that we have chosen to put in a specific XML script.
That makes sense.
When I make VRML Scenes myself, I most of the time don't use Interpolator nodes, but use Script nodes for bringing the scene to live, which is much**4 more flexible.
These Script nodes use the scene graph as if they were some hiiiiiiiiiigh-level render API. Technically, the scripting is inside the VRML file, but in my mind, these are two separate components.
It is similar to HTML, which serves very well for displaying 2D content, but for making real applications (for example a mail tool like hotmail.com is), you need some other technology (programmable logic) that uses the HTML as a render engine for 2D content.
Open Source projects have a maintainer who accepts or refuses changes to the project. And i guess a maintainer has some power on guiding the direction he wants a project developed into.
Yes but a maintener can't avoid forks happening on the project. Forks would mean that XML scripting, XML datas sharing coud be interpreted in another way depending on the derivated version. And in our mind, durable content, durable information, is the key. Thanks to XML, the data, info and interactivity you code have to be reusable after years.
Before i answer this quote: I don't talk about open-sourcing the whole Alpharis application. As stated below, I think only the X3D viewer part should be open-sourced. The knowledge manager and sharing tool should remain closed source. This way you can ensure (with the overlay logo and proxy support) that poeple _will_ buy a license if they use it.
Now answering the quote:
I'd say if you keep your application (whole Alpharis) closed source, the content will survive as long as your company is alive _and_ supports Alpharis.
An application is always dependent on the System it runs on. (OS and hardware). And if that advances over time, there must be somebody who adopts an application to that.
It might happen that Microsoft strengthens their security model and a yellow bar appears when an ActiveX control is loaded. Ok, this case did already happen, and it did not kill content, it just made it a bit less convenient to view a content (more clicks required).
I had the case that suddenly an ActiveX control cannot load local files anymore if they contain spaces in the file name. This came becasue MS changed the representation of local file names in the interface to ActiveX controls. From "C:\Some Directory\Some File.ext" to "file://c|Some%20Directory/Some%20File.ext" or similar, i don't know.
In such a case there must be somebody who wants to adopt the application (Alpharis) to the changes in the system it runs on.
With open source this is guaranteed. (As long as poeple are interested in the software, but that's not really a limitation).
XML is self-documenting somehow, but it'd require rewriting the whole app from scratch if its application died. Open source would only require modifications.OB
I don't hope it, but if your customers want durability of their contents, they might be afraid that your company dies after a few years or dropps the project, and then Alpharis is unsupported. Poeple have seen this a lot in the context of webbased 3D.
(my 2 cents)
If these "global datas" are misunterpreted, all the common efforts are ruined.
Can you please explain what is the scenario you are afraid of?
Of course, should you not want to implement a save-to-disk feature, poeple could do it by themselves.
In the field of streaming audio this feature is not always wanted by software vendors and content providers.
Is this the kind of things, what you are afraid of with open-source?
Yes, that sounds good. I see your software as two parts:
.. a) the X3D Viewer, and
.. b) the whole application that performs the knowledge management and
........ uses the X3D Viewer for displaying 3D content.
Maybe we could consider that the X3D players and the Alpharis Application could be two diffirent programs. The Alpharis Application would use the Open Source X3D plus specific code. The Alpharis player would get the Open Source.
That's what i mean.
Now we're talking about the same.