Re: Performer at ITEC
Rick Weyrauch (rweyrauch++at++paradigmsim.com)
Mon, 27 Apr 1998 09:29:17 -0500
Angus Dorbie wrote:
>
> Steve Baker wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 23 Apr 1998, Rick Weyrauch wrote:
> >
> > > I am also interested in developing an open 'freeware' scene graph
> > > toolkit for OpenGL. The graphics community (both on Linux and Win32)
> > > could use such a tool.
> > >
> > > With the advent of Fahrenheit, it there a problem with SGI releasing the
> > > OpenGL++ spec to the public?
> >
> > Kurt Akeley said:
> >
> > "SGI will no longer be able to push OpenGL++ (though they have no objection to
> > others picking up the work)."
> >
> > Also, the OpenGL++ spec presumably belongs to the OpenGL ARB and not to SGI,
> > so I presume we'd have to talk to the ARB to get a copy of it.
>
> This in no way indicates SGI official policy but I don't see how you can
> say
> this. Just because a document is presented to a comittee for review,
> doesn't
> convey all the rights to it's contents, particularly the ownership of
> any IP
> described in it, but I'm no lawyer and don't know all that was said or
> exchanged w.r.t. the spec.
>
> >
> > I have a copy of the spec - but it's under NDA from SGI - so I can't use that
> > as the basis of a 'Mesa++' effort. Following Kurt's announcement, there should
> > be no problem getting hold of the current spec without NDA - I presume.
>
> There's a big difference between running with an OpenGL scene graph idea
> and
> using the NDA spec lock, stock and barrel. None of this is is SGI
> policy, but even
> if the OpenGL++ spec were left to the ARB, it may very well be the case
> that
> nobody on the ARB is interested in OpenGL++ anymore. As I have already
> pointed
> out most ARB members now have a significant stake in Fahrenheit or their
> own
> Scene Graph strategies like Java 3D, and Raytheon isn't on the ARB :-(.
>
> Why would you want or need to base Mesa++ on OpenGL++ if the rest of the
> world
> is using FSG and there is no _real OpenGL++.
The only reason for using the OpenGL++ spec is that is (was) a spec that
a number of net-developer could write code to. Without a solid spec,
developing a useful scene graph library would be chaotic.
If SGI does not allow us to use the OpenGL++ spec, then we'll have to
come up with our own in order to develop a 'Mesa++'.
CYA statement:
I am speaking for myself in this thread, Rick Weyrauch, late-night
graphics hacker, not Rick Weyrauch Vega engineer.
>
> I want to make it absolutely clear that these are just a personal
> observations
> of the issues raised by Steve and don't reflect SGIs views in any way.
>
> Cheers,Angus.
>
> --
> "Only the mediocre are always at their best." -- Jean Giraudoux
>
> For advanced 3D graphics Performer + OpenGL based examples and tutors:
> http://www.dorbie.com/
Rick
--
Rick Weyrauch voice: (972) 960-2301
Paradigm Simulation Inc. fax: (972) 960-2303
14900 Landmark Blvd., Suite 400 rweyrauch++at++paradigmsim.com
Dallas TX 75240 www.paradigmsim.com
=======================================================================
List Archives, FAQ, FTP: http://www.sgi.com/Technology/Performer/
Submissions: info-performer++at++sgi.com
Admin. requests: info-performer-request++at++sgi.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2
on Mon Aug 10 1998 - 17:57:18 PDT