Re: [ogpx] Tourist use case

[Carlo Wood <carlo at alinoe.com>]

Using common sense, I'd say:

* If you try to rez an object, policy comes in to determine if that is allowed.

* Once an object is rezzed, EVERYONE that is in the region (that is allowed to
  enter the region thus) can SEE that object (and interact with it).

I realize that it is *possible* for the region to implement a policy
where it selectively shows data to some people and not to others, but
I don't think we have to officially support every possible way to screw
up shared experience in VWRAP, just because it would be possible to do so.

Compare with a protocol like SMPT: that dictates that if some email is
received, it is required to react in one of a few given ways. There are
other ways, but that would make the system stop functioning as intended,
so that is Not The Idea.


I agree with you that information needed to see a rezzed object should
come from the region (simulator), so -- in principle there is no direct
reason that a viewer needs to have access to every asset server whose
assets are rezzed.


An interesting question is now: what about assets that make up an
avatar? Once in-world, attaching a new attachment, or changing clothes
or shape, is just the same as rezzing of course: if the asset server
allows access (by that region) than the region can buffer it and show
it to everyone; otherwise attachment, or change of appearance, is disallowed.
However, in the case of teleportation I think we need to act more
intelligent than just black or white (allow or disallow the TP):
I'm in favour of allowing the TP independent of assets being used at
that moment, but instead detach assets and/or Ruth the avatar if
need be (at least, give the user that option).

On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 10:23:43AM -0700, Joshua Bell wrote:
> Be careful about blurring the use of "asset services" between "stuff in
> regions" and "stuff I have". I think there is a big intersection - and may have
> the same characteristics and/or protocols, but I also think they are are
> distinct. I would guess that there will be asset services associated with both
> agents and regions - off the top of my head:
> 
> Uses of an agent-associated "asset" service:
> * content to client app (inspect your inventory)
> * content from client app (upload/import to inventory)
> * content to region (rez something)
> * content from region (buy/take something)
> * content to agent (give something)
> * content from agent (receive something)
> 
> Uses of an region-associated "asset" service:
> * content to client app (see the world)
> * content from client app (upload/import to region)
> * content to region (during teleport/region crossing)
> * content from region (during teleport/region crossing)
> * content to agent (buy/take something)
> * content from agent (rez something)
> 
> I'm using "asset" in quotes since that term may be overloaded. "Content" might
> be a better term.

-- 
Carlo Wood <carlo at alinoe.com>