From carson@siggraph.org Tue Sep 30 21:18:29 1997 Received: from siggraph.cgrg.ohio-state.edu (siggraph.cgrg.ohio-state.edu [128.146.18.100]) by dkuug.dk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA28426 for ; Tue, 30 Sep 1997 21:18:27 +0100 Received: from study.huntleigh.net (carson@siggraph.org) by siggraph.cgrg.ohio-state.edu (8.8.5/941010.52) with SMTP id QAA29079; Tue, 30 Sep 1997 16:18:16 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970930142310.009d6fd0@siggraph.cgrg.ohio-state.edu> X-Sender: carson@siggraph.cgrg.ohio-state.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 14:23:41 -0600 To: SC24@dkuug.dk From: Steve Carson Subject: Second "Proposal" from the Rennes meeting Cc: neil.trevett@3dlabs.com, puk@igraphics.com, rikk@best.com, cmarrin@sgi.com, gavin@acm.org, jch@merl.com, msc@sgi.com, bblau@intervista.com, honda@soft.arch.sony.co.jp Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" This is the text of the MPEG-4 groups proposal to us during the Rennes meeting. This is one of the two proposals referred to in the output statement I circulated yesterday. This was written by Olivier Avaro, the chairman of their systems ad hoc group. - - - How to construct a collaborative framework between MPEG and VRML? Proposal (short term) 1. Textual format: A textual format is standardized in the VRML standard. MPEG doesn't intend to utilize a textual format as only binary format have normative value in MPEG. 2. Binary format: A binary format is standardised in the MPEG-4 standard. MPEG offers to VRML the of use this binary format. VRML is also defining a binary format. If VRML wishes, MPEG is ready to provide support to merge the best features of the two format in a single specification. 3. Specification (1): Nodes and concepts defined by VRML and used by MPEG will be documented in the MPEG-4 specification in the following way : - Semantics: Option 1: Self contained specification, Option 2: References with a pointer to the VRML spec. - Syntax is defined in the MPEG specification. Where the semantics are the same, node names may be the same, if VRML wishes. MPEG has no preference about it. 4. Specification (2): New nodes defined by MPEG will be documented in the MPEG-4 specification in the following way: - The semantic is defined in the MPEG spec., - The syntax is defined in the MPEG spec. MPEG invites VRML experts to collaborate in the definition of these new concepts and nodes. 5. Specification (3): MPEG-4 will specify profiles to accommodate the needs of its component communities. Proposal (medium term) As a result of the better understanding which the two communities have reached at the Rennes meeting, MPEG sees it as desirable that MPEG and VRML converge at some point in the future. Candidate areas for collaboration in the medium term are: - Definition of the semantics of new nodes (e.g. 2D, 2D/3D nodes, streaming nodes), - Definition of the binary representation of new nodes (e.g. Scripts, . . .), - Definition of APIs (e.g. AAVS, . . .), - Definition of coded format for streamed audiovisual information (texture, audio, mesh compression). --------------------------------------------------------- Steve Carson phone: +1-505-521-7399 GSC Associates Inc. fax: +1-505-521-9321 5272 Redman Road e-mail: carson@siggraph.org Las Cruces, NM 88011 USA ---------------------------------------------------------