Re: MOO and VRML 2.0 ?

• Date: Sun, 18 Feb 1996 12:55:52 PST
• From:
  "George M. Ellenburg" <gme@nebula.ispace.com>
• cc: moo-cows@parc.xerox.com
• Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
• In-Reply-To: <1.5.4b11.32.19960218203931.00685c54@mailbox.syr.edu>

On Sun, 18 Feb 1996, Kipp the Kidd wrote:
> I found that moo works fine with small text codes, such as RIPterm.  a
> RIPterm picture takes about the same space as an object's description, so
> simply sending a picture instead of a descripton takes no more work for the
> MOO.  The 3d net client I hope to have finished soon will use quick codes
> like RIP, and will download bitmap images from servers more capable of
> handling big things like that...  a web server.

Actually, as much as I hate RIP in a BBSing/ Telecommunications 
standpoint (preferring Galacticomm's Worldgroup C/S based architecture) I 
definately can see where RIP could be useful for MOOing!  Have you 
considered talking to Telegrafix or Durand Communication on possibly 
receiving the source?

• Re: MOO and VRML 2.0 ?
• From: Kipp the Kidd <mcmudge@mailbox.syr.edu>

• Prev: Re: MOO and VRML 2.0 ?
• Next: Re: MOO and VRML 2.0 ?
• Index: MOO-cows
• Thread: MOO-cows