[Opensim-dev] AssetBase and metadata

[Teravus Ovares]

To the 'all assets have inventory items associated with them', no,
they don't, however, there's no harm in requesting the inventory item
where possible.    It would limit the UUIDs that systems would have
access to as a reference, as well.   I'm sure that there will be some
methods that must use Asset ID.   Mostly, images.  I suppose object
inventory might use Asset ID also, but probably does not have to until
they're requested by the client for editing.

To the 'So I guess I don't understand what specific case you're
referring to?', See last Tuesday's Zero meeting for several references
to the pitfalls of Hypergrid (and it's not just Zero saying things to
criticize it.  It's our users as well.  That was a widely positive
meeting towards Hypergrid to the detriment of LLOGP.  Mingled within
that, the way we handle property was the main criticism.

Reference: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/User:Zero_Linden/Office_Hours/2009_Jan_27

I was saying that currently, we're doing nothing at all to limit
trust.   If we maintain this approach, it will be a big factor in
other, non-currently-codified, standards being adopted and It'll
likely be impossible to fully implement other 'permissioned' standards
without some way to check the permissions first (such as OGP).
Currently, directly requesting Assets precludes this option.   Not all
virtual worlds will have 'Property', but the ones that do will suffer.
   Comparing to a web server, think .htaccess.

Best Regards

Teravus

On 2/2/09, Stefan Andersson <stefan at tribalmedia.se> wrote:
> Are we sure all assets have inventory items associated with them?
>
> I can think of scripted objects that set textureIds programatically.
> (Melanie pointed that out to me)
>
> You can also have the case where you upload a texture (yes, it's in
> inventory) apply it to a shirt, then delete the original inventory item (the
> asset is still referenced from within the shirt asset, but is in no
> inventory)
>
> So I guess I don't understand what specific case you're referring to?
>
> Best regards,
> Stefan Andersson
> Tribal Media AB
>
>
> > Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 23:58:55 -0500
> > From: teravus at gmail.com
> > To: opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> > Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] AssetBase and metadata
> >
> > Is there any reason that we don't request items from the asset server
> > internally by the inventory UUID instead of the asset UUID?
> > Requesting assets by inventory UUID would make it a LOT simpler to
> > apply permissions at the trusted service level instead of at the
> > simulator level.
> >
> > Best Regards
> >
> > Teravus
> >
> > On 2/1/09, Mike Mazur <mmazur at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 07:37:27 -0500
> > > Sean Dague <sdague at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > It's fine for the object to be called AssetMetaData, just don't make
> > > > the property that.
> > >
> > > On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 14:51:12 +0000 (GMT)
> > > MW <michaelwri22 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I agree, I'd say call the class AssetMetaData, but just call the
> > > > property (in AssetBase) MetaData.
> > >
> > > Makes perfect sense. Thanks for the feedback.
> > >
> > > Mike
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Opensim-dev mailing list
> > > Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> > > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Opensim-dev mailing list
> > Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>
>