I am hesitant to simply assume that we will even determine that we will need a
"method" analogy that is implemented in routes, as I think that there is very
little mature VRML 2.0 content, and I think that it is safe to say that nobody
has really worked enough with Script nodes, Prototypes, and the External
Authoring Interface to know what Object-Oriented VRML looks like. I have
"dabbled" in it myself, and I have found that most browsers cannot yet support
much of the functionality needed to use these features, so I doubt anybody else
could have gotten much further. . .
Thus, I think that one of the ways in which this group could best serve the
VRML community in the short term is to try to produce content in an "object
oriented" manner. Only then can we have a practical understanding of what is
lacking in the current specification. From this list of weaknesses, we can
perhaps come up with "extensions" in the form of a preprocessor, or perhaps
even through providing prototypes, JAVA classes, and other such assets for
facilitating object-oriented development.
Thanks,
Curtis Beeson
-- The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than whether a submarine can swim. - Edsgar Dijkstra