[sldev] [META][AWG]log chat of AWG meeting Friday, Oct 5, 2007

Argent Stonecutter secret.argent at gmail.com
Thu Oct 11 07:09:04 PDT 2007


On 11-Oct-2007, at 00:19, dirk husemann wrote:
> Argent Stonecutter wrote:
>> On 10-Oct-2007, at 01:07, dirk husemann wrote:
>>> if yo change owner & group, doesn't that constitute a transfer?  
>>> with a
>>> no-transfer asset you'd go against the wishes of the creator then.

>> Owner, yes. Group no. But more to the point, *permissions are
>> inherently advisory between domains operated by different  
>> organizations*.

> i know. we worked that out. my thinking though was that we assume
> permissions to be binding and not explicitly spec that they are just a
> bunch of bits that we can ignore. what's your thinking on that?

I think that we need to define how domains manage trust. I think we  
need to pay a lot more attention to that than I've seen happening.

>>> inventory changes: that raises the interesting question of  
>>> whether my
>>> inventory is modulated by the domain i'm in? in other words, will my
>>> inventory change depending on where i am or will i always see my  
>>> full
>>> inventory, i just won't be able to rez some items in certain  
>>> domains?

>> OK, I'm not just talking about the list of objects in my inventory,
>> I'm talking about the assets themselves. When you go from one domain
>> to another, and go into your inventory, and bring up the  
>> properties of
>> an object in your inventory, where is the asset that you are bringing
>> up the properties on? The trust relationship between the domain the
>> asset is in and the domain you're in should determine if you can  
>> bring
>> up the properties at all, and *separately* whether you can get at the
>> content of the asset itself.

> bringing up an asset in my inventory is for me a client internal
> operation.

It's an operation between the client and the asset server and the  
agent server, all of which are part of the architecture.

Plus, the inventory exists in multiple domains, no? Or is there some  
master agent domain that owns all the agents in all domains?

> as long as it's not rezz'ed i don't think we have to bother
> about which region domain i'm in.

It depends on what agent domain you're in, no?

> if i change a property of an asset in
> my inventory that should go back directly to the asset server of that
> object.

Even ignoring an asset that exists in multiple inventories, you can  
have an asset twice in your inventory with different permissions. You  
can't copy assets every time you make a copy in your inventory or  
even every time you give someone a copy, there's no point, you only  
need to copy the properties and leave a reference to the original.  
The copy in your inventory doesn't even need to exist on any asset  
server until it gets rezzed into a region domain. Then it shows up as  
a reference on that domain's asset server pointing to the data on the  
original server. You're wearing that copy, it's in your inventory,  
but it's a reference to the original until you create a new asset.



More information about the SLDev mailing list