[Uni-verse] PCC meeting on Monday

[Gert Svensson]

Lauri Savioja wrote:

>Hi everyone,
>
>I've now read through the VR and acrhitectural market analyses and
>proposals. In addition, I had a very good discussion in Budapest with
>-+ architects yesterday. Based on these, I would like to suggest that
>we should decide as soon as possible the following items:
>
>1) What are our final demonstration scenarios ? I think that the demos
>should show as much as possible of the results obtained in different
>WPs. 
>

That is a good point. The architect and game demo should cover pretty much.

>One of the main aspects should be integration. As Uni-Verse has
>strong effort in connectivity, we should be able to clearly show that
>at least all the pieces of software we have done interoperate with
>each other smoothly. Integration to other software (such as 3D Studio
>Max and Maya) is essential as well.
>
>2) How do we implement the demonstrations? It means at least:
>
>   a) Specifcation for each demo must be done. It might be a good idea
>that each demo has both an owner and a main implementor. The main
>implementor could write the first version of the spec, and make the
>required integration work. The role of the owner would be to
>participate in the design, accept the specification, and test and
>verify the result. For example, the architecture demo could be owned
>by -+, but who will be the main implementor?
>  
>
Maybe I misunderstand this, but the architect demo doesn't require any 
programming per se.
It only uses some of the tools developed by other WP:s

>   b) Check that the specs can be fulfilled with current results of WPs
>
>   c) React to the results of 2b) above. At the moment, I see there
>will be some gaps (e.g. both VR and architecture analysis tell that
>there is a need for a acoustic material editor which doesn't exist in
>any plan).
>
>I think that the acrhitecture report has several issues highlighting
>the importance of a disk-based server. If we decide to proceed towards
>such a final result there definitely is a strong need for such a
>server. For this reason, I have nothing against it, if people at FHG
>are willing to put more effort on implementing the server.
>
>It seems that I have mostly forgotten the idea behind the evaluation
>of the Blender Movie :-(. If there is an earlier e-mail or document
>discussing this, I would appreciate a pointer.
>  
>
I think Ton can give the best description of the project.

Best Regards
Gert

>Still some comments on the acoustic modeling. Please, note that in WP7
>we work with room acoustic modeling. Working with noise and structural
>vibrations require quite different methods. Of course, we can build
>demonstrations showing the potential use of such methods, but they
>will consists of only fake acoustic models.
>
>Regards,
>	Lauri
>
>PS. In the VR report: "audiolization" -> "auralization" :-)
>
>On Thu, 01 Sep 2005, Gert Svensson wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Dear Friends,
>>
>>I hope you have had a nice and relaxing summer.
>>
>>Let me remind of the PCC meeing on Monday 5 September 10.00-12.00 CET DST
>>via IRC server: irc.freenode.net <http://irc.freenode.net> channel: 
>>#uni-verse
>>
>>* Agenda
>>
>>Status of the state of the art review
>>
>>Status of the segment market analyses
>>
>>Version of Verse to use
>>
>>Changes in the project plan
>>
>>Reminder of the mid term internal review
>>
>>Next meetings
>>
>>
>>* Proposals
>>
>>This is my and Peter Becker's proposals for decision
>>Please feel free to comment and start the discussion before the meeting
>>
>>+ Version of Verse
>>
>>The PCC decides what version to use
>>The version of Verse to use currently  is version 5.
>>If new versions of Verse is released the PCC will consider which version
>>to use.
>>
>>+ Changes in the project plan
>>
>>The Verse - Blender integration is added as an deliverable
>>
>>The FHG work is concentrated on making a Verse server with disk based 
>>storage and access control.
>>Less work is directed towards the radiosity module and the the proxy 
>>reduction server is removed
>>
>>Everyone seems to think that we should get rid of the game demonstrator 
>>and concentrate on content creation instead.
>>One idea would be to replace the game demonstrator with an evaluation of 
>>the Blender Movie project.
>>However this is still under discussion with Blender.
>>
>>Best Regards
>>Gert
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Uni-verse mailing list
>>Uni-verse at projects.blender.org
>>http://projects.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/uni-verse
>>    
>>
>
>  
>