I realize proposals of this kind can only sketch out skeletons of
what would be the end results, and far more will be available than
can be touched on here. But one thing that struck me was that
it seems entirely 3D-oriented. 2D is, of course, a very simple
subset of 3D; and it might be worth noting that many vrml structures
are going to be 2D. We are going to have to get used to switching
between planes and spaces all the time (as well as just embedding
planes in spaces), and a good test of the simplicity of a proposal
is whether the planar structures actually are the degenerate
cases of spatial structures that they should be. If we have to
carry all the 3D baggage along when constructing 2D environments,
then the language isn't simple enough. IMHO. [I don't think
this will be a problem, but just thought I'd make it explicit.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris.Holt@newcastle.ac.uk ftp://tuda.ncl.ac.uk/pub/local/ncmh1/nameplate.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Teach me to live, that I may dread / The grave as little as my web.