[Opensim-dev] Global identifiers

Mon Aug 30 00:54:17 UTC 2010

On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 00:29 +0000, diva at metaverseink.com wrote:

> OpenSim core has been contributing center-front in VWRAP: John Hurliman 
> is a core developer of OpenSim.
> 
Umm, right. I said as much.  But you pretty much blew off VWRAP as not
worth your time and had no interest in representing HyperGrid concepts
there early on. Please, just drop it. You don't need to paint me as a
bad guy to discount my ideas.  The team will do what it wants anyway. 

As I said, I'll comment on HyperGrid in VWRAP when I see a proposal to
comment on.  In the IETF thats our version of working code.

Mike

> Mike Dickson wrote:
> > That's great to hear.  And the first I've heard of it.  I'm on the VWRAP
> > mailing list and yes, John has made some very substantive contributions
> > to the discussion.  I haven't seen anything from OpenSim core during any
> > part of the discussion to date.  I'm a pretty smart guy but not
> > omnipotent.  I've simply interpreted the lack of participation  as lack
> > of interest and past comments would tend to support that (I can dig them
> > out if you like).  And there is no "general feeling" in VWRAP as to your
> > proposal since its never been presented or discussed there.
> > 
> > I'm not interested in a war, just open dialog and a sincere interest in
> > interoperability.  I'll be glad to read the proposal when its made.  In
> > the meantime I'd appreciate you not attribute negative motives to
> > anything I've said. I've been simply trying to make technical arguments
> > against an approach I think is wrong headed and not though out.  I've
> > seen discussion here pretty much get cut off when a core member
> > "dictates" the solution. Melanie seems to have made up her mind.  Fine.
> > Go build it. Best of luck to you.  In the meantime I'll look forward to
> > the Hypergrid proposal to VWRAP and reserve my comments for that time. 
> > 
> > BTW, I've found the VWRAP discussions to be pretty open and devoid of
> > politics.  People will assert politics over almost anything of course
> > but the dialog has been mostly open and good natured (and quiet lately).
> > It will be good to have you at the table.  Given OpenSim gets a fair bit
> > of attention it would have been nice if you'd been there all along.
> > 
> > Mike
> > 
> > On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 00:00 +0000, diva at metaverseink.com wrote:
> >> Mike,
> >>
> >> That's an interesting statement to make, considering that John Hurliman 
> >> and I are working on writing up the *working* Hypergrid 1.5 as a 
> >> proposal to VWRAP, since we have both concluded that the concepts being 
> >> talked there lately, without any implementation behind them, are 
> >> essentially indistinguishable from the working HG 1.5 that lots of 
> >> people are already using.
> >>
> >> It seems that you are trying really hard to make this look like a war 
> >> between OpenSimulator and VWRAP. I don't think that's the general 
> >> feeling in VWRAP, I think it's just you. The proposal to VWRAP will 
> >> happen. Hopefully, most people there will be able to assess the 
> >> technical issues, independent of the political ones. (emphasis on 
> >> *hopefully*)
> >>
> >> Diva / Crista
> >>
> >> Mike Dickson wrote:
> >>> Fine, then do what you like.  The code's all available.  If I don't like
> >>> it I can change it.  Of course that sort of shoots holes in
> >>> interoperability. But then I didn't feel that hyper-grid belonged in
> >>> core either for the same reason. 
> >>>
> >>> I think you've way over trivialized the whole set of interactions
> >>> between agent, asset and simulator services in situations where those
> >>> services are defined by different principals.  As Meadbh said, this
> >>> feels like optimizing to solve a specific problem before you've really
> >>> looked at the larger issues. It might be instructive just to simply walk
> >>> through some use cases and see where things fall apart.  Alot of that
> >>> discussion has already taken place on the VWRAP list but OpenSim core
> >>> seems to be dead set against involvement in that.
> >>>
> >>> I don't see a way to contribute here beyond the opinion I've already
> >>> voiced so I'll drop this.
> >>>
> >>> Mike
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, 2010-08-29 at 22:56 +0000, Melanie wrote:
> >>>> Sorry, i disagree. The information included is defined by the
> >>>> REQUIRED data on the recipient, not on what data the sender wants to
> >>>> provide. the recipient NEEDS a displayable field. It can't be optional.
> >>>>
> >>>> Melanie
> >>>>
> >>>> Mike Dickson wrote:
> >>>>> If the decision is to go ahead and do cache-able data then I'd agree, do
> >>>>> it as attribute NVP's and make them optional. The originating agennt
> >>>>> service is then free to define the semantics of the attributes it
> >>>>> exposes.  
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Mike
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Sun, 2010-08-29 at 21:42 +0000, Ai Austin wrote:
> >>>>>>> From: diva at metaverseink.com
> >>>>>>> protocol://authority/resource_type/resource_id[/cacheable_data]
> >>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> consider ensuring that at least the name is provided in a form that 
> >>>>>> can be resolved fast and locally by including the avatar 
> >>>>>> firstname+lastname - in whatever form the providing grid wishes to 
> >>>>>> address issues raised by others - so long as the strings are "legal" 
> >>>>>> in the creator/owner fields.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> would it be worth making sure that the "cachable data" is in the form 
> >>>>>> of keyword=value pairs, and hence put in a "parameter" form after ? 
> >>>>>> rather than a final /?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> protocol://authority/resource_type/resource_id[?key_value_pair[,...]]
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> with a minimum suggested (or 
> >>>>>> required?)  avatarname=firstname+lastname if the resource_type = user
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> 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
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> 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