[sldev] [META][AWG]log chat of AWG meeting Friday, Oct 5, 2007
hud at zurich.ibm.com
Mon Oct 8 02:21:16 PDT 2007
Lawson English wrote:
> Argent Stonecutter wrote:
> In my case, specifically, I'm talkign about the keywords/functions
> data for the floater I'm making. This obviously is never going to be
> published as an asset, but it still should "live" in the client. The
> issue I ran into that got me so incensed about this whole thing is
> that the folder class in the client is chained to the asset server.
> Anything "not an asset" can't be put into a folder. The classes
> themselves are so chained I can't derive a non-asset folder class from
> them without rewriting almost the entire class.
> This is a trivial example, but what about more interesting ones?
> I have perhaps 100 sample scripts in my inventory. There's no easy way
> to browse them save by name because they are assets. Why can't I have
> "proto" scripts that live in a folder that points to one or more xml
> files or to a database that only lives on my computer, but that I can
> still manipulate as a "first class" bit of data for every purpose
> EXCEPT dumping into some other inventory? (and translation mechanisms
> for most types of non-assets could still be automated ala the
> conventions that apple developed 24 years ago for the Mac clipboard
> and refined in the OpenDoc spec).
> What about the notes on friends/enemies/places of interest that
> everyone keeps? Those aren't sortable either.
> What about sculpty textures created with a client plug-in that aren't
> loaded to the asset server?
those are all client-local. nothing to do with the architecture or asset
at all. seems to me it's got a lot to do with how the client is implemented.
> And, in the world wide grid, what about assets that can't be used on
> one grid, but can be in another, that live in my inventory as "assets"
> even though they're not assets on the currently accessed grid?
> In principle, anything that a user can view inside the client, could
> become an asset, either as a notecard, or a screenshot-texture, but
> some things are more "asset-like" than others. And some things are an
> asset in one context (made on grid x) but not another (incompatible
> with grid y) or ARE assets, period, but you don't have permissions
> to take them with you.
i disagree. only things that you have rezzed on the grid --- that is,
things OTHERS can see/access --- should become an asset. stuff that only
you can see i would not consider an asset in the grid-sense.
dr dirk husemann, pervasive computing, ibm zurich research lab
--- hud at zurich.ibm.com --- +41 44 724 8573 --- SL: dr scofield
More information about the SLDev