Progress on the spec

[cabanier]

There haven't been updates to the spec in quite a while and the current one doesn't reflect decisions that were made since (ie make derive from ) /facetoface how can we make more progress on the model tag spec?

[DRx3D]

Rather than making progress on writing a specification document, there needs to be

• the domain of applicability of this element
  • will this be for thumbnail models
  • will multiple models be integrated
  • will the element support animation
  • will the element support lighting
• an explanation of what this spec would provide that cannot be already done
• why existing solutions cannot be used (e.g., model-viewer)
• an explanation of how this plans on handling multiple models, animation, and lighting
• how the element will keep up with changes to other specs (file formats) that supply the models
• What happens when the web community finds that does not support a needed/desired feature that is included in a library.

Note that it is fine to exclude certain capabilities, it should just be stated so.

[npolys]

Yes, related to # 86

The document should justify the approach and compare and contrast to the demonstrated standards already in this space and described by W3C Community Groups (and Class A Liaisons)... specifically the ISO-IEC Standards of X3D. With a nice alignment to the DOM, CSS, HTML, glTF2, and WebAudio, X3D Version 4 was just ratified through the full standard process and voting by National Bodies:

https://web3d.org/x3d4 see also: https://webx3d.org/

The standard is implemented by two open source javascript libraries: X3DOM https://www.x3dom.org/ (WebXR supported) X_ITE https://github.com/create3000/x_ite/wiki

The MIME types for X3D are model/x3d+xml, model/x3d+binary, and model/x3d+vrml. The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) has approved model/x3d+xml as the primary MIME media type for X3D media in XML encoding.

In the Metaverse Standards Forum 3D Web Interoperability Group, we are discussing the X3D pattern of of url and uris for different kinds of linked content and experiences; also we are looking at the conformance mechanism inherent in the Profiles and Components that enables different levels of interactive 3D functionality to be specified.

We believe that we should work together to update this spec

https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2077.html