Interesting point. I like it. But we are walking a thin line between
"browsing" (walking around and looking) capabilites and "authoring/edting"
capabilities. Obviously, children's games have noted that authoring can be
fun. But I ask -- are you sure vrml needs to support this?
Note that no one else can see the result of creating multiple instances of stuff.
Suppose I owned a vrml site with a toy chest, out of which you could pull
a whole bunch of toys. Some kid finds it and plays; leaves toys all
over the room. You think I'm going to let him write that back onto my disk?
We have yet to solve the more general problem of multi-player interaction,
intelligent agents, etc. Also, animation. I'd like to lump the above
discussion into that discussion. Maybe we can start that discussion soon as
the current Inline debate is clarified?
>So I guess I think there should be one form of linking behaviour which adds a
>number of sets of children, then becomes dead - ie, it has a numeric limit on
>the number of children sets to add to a scene before becomming dead.
$$$ This is called accounting. Ya pay yer $$$ to toys-r-us and you get a
vrml spray can. Every time you spray, out pops a new vrml toy. After a while,
the spray can goes dead, and you have to get another. (Idea courtesy of
jeff wilkinson).
--linas