Re: [ogpx] Tourist use case

[Morgaine <morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com>]

On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 12:38 AM, Lawson English <lenglish5 at cox.net> wrote:

It seems to me that the MOST touristy mode we will ever see is the free-for-all from the original OGP test where simple TP and naught else was supported.

There was no "free-for-all" interop in the original OGP test:  there was merely TP from an SL grid to several separately-administered sims, with no framework in place for such sims to express their independent policies, nor any design for such a framework.  This was unable to support a tourism model at all since that requires DDP otherwise travellers from multiple worlds having distinct policies can't meet up in a common tourist resort.  It was very far indeed from a free-for-all.  In fact it was much more like a plan for region assimilation by an advancing empire. ;-)  All it could ever do is build walled gardens.

Your comment also needs to be examined in another light.  "The MOST touristy mode we will ever see" from whom?  Your words seem to presuppose that only the deployments by the current majority provider are relevant.

It's important not to confuse what an individual world provider such as LL will do, and what the whole set of deployers of the protocol will do.  If we are successful in specifying VWRAP services flexibly as envisaged by David, we can expect all the possible deployment patterns to be exercised to different degrees across the breadth of the Internet by many different providers and many individuals.






More specifically, it is reasonable to assume that the Opensim developers, deployers and users who are present in the workgroup are here because they believe that the protocol can be designed in a manner that is useful to their intended interop and world models.  They're already working on various kinds of open interop model, with or without VWRAP, so the need to support tourism flexibly is not just a theory.






If we do a good job and VWRAP becomes an effective means of implementing the kind of interop that the very broad Opensim-based community finds useful, then there is every likelihood that the high-tourism deployments will become very popular indeed, in that community.  That's my answer to the from whom question.






People want to travel to far-off places, in virtual worlds as much as in the physical world.  This desire is fueled by world diversity, not by seeing more of the same thing within one's own world alone.  We can reasonably expect this to make tourism between independent worlds hugely attractive, even exciting, and hence popular.







Morgaine.





======================================

On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 12:38 AM, Lawson English <lenglish5 at cox.net> wrote:

Meadhbh Hamrick wrote:

but didn't we say that we were going to focus on "second life-like"
worlds in this WG? isn't that why it was formed? shouldn't the tourist
model be an effort of the MMOX group? i thought that was the reason we
kept the MMOX mailing list up, so work could continue on that type of
virtual world.

-meadhbh/infinity
 

It seems to me that the MOST touristy mode we will ever see is the free-for-all from the original OGP test where
simple TP and naught else was supported.

Will all worlds be willing to support that one? Obviously not (e.g firewalled corporate site), but I think many will, including LL on the PG
section of its main grid.


Lawson