[Fiware-miwi] three.js WebComponents

Philipp Slusallek Philipp.Slusallek at dfki.de
Mon Nov 4 17:56:08 CET 2013


Hi,

Sounds great!!

Again let me know if you want to discuss a more general and abstract 
handling of events (at least for 3D stuff).

Best,

	Philipp

Am 04.11.2013 08:02, schrieb Antti Kokko:
> Hello,
>
> I have been doing research and testing with Polymer and input devices.
> Regarding Polymer it really feels the way to go with the 2D-UI GE. I
> read somewhere that the AngularJS will be moving towards Shadow DOM as
> well and will include Polymer later on.
>
> With Polymer I have been doing a test implementation for chat app we
> have in WebRocket. Implementing the actual UI component with Polymer was
> pretty trivial and very nice to work with from a web designer point of
> view. As end result there is clear readable output including 2 html
> files and one css file. All functions have been encapsulated to the
> component itself. Therefore it becomes re-usable although in this case
> the component needs data binding and event hooking corresponding to the
> backend used. But in general when the backend is solid and decided
> implementing the web components will be nice work. Polymer already gives
> a huge set of components ready to use and work with. For this case I
> used polymer-collapse to slide up/down div elements I created. For this
> I needed only to import the corresponding polymer-collapse html file and
> hook it to my div element. Very easy and convenient. Right now I try to
> tackle the require js issues for WebRocket related to Polymer.
>
> For input devices I have been researching and testing touch JS libs and
> Gamepad API. For touch I tested couple of libraries and all of them
> worked well. As end result I chose jquery plugin and tested it against
> iPhone and iPad. Worked pretty well and I managed to get taps for 1-4
> fingers, sliding and pinching to work. Shake and rotate didn´t work for
> some reason but I didn´t go deeper with that issue.
>
> For Gamepad I used Gamepad API
> [https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gamepad/raw-file/default/gamepad.html]. Got it
> working well with Chrome. With Firefox it didn´t work even with Nightly
> build, don´t know the reason. Anyway the implementation is already
> tested against web rocket and Jonne did a nice test with the avatar app
> we have. Gamepad works like a charm. For tests we used XBOX 360
> controller and Playstation controller. With Windows just plugging the
> device to USB port and pushing some button is everything needed. Both
> gamepads worked right away.
>
> The next thing with input is to test/research is Kinect.
>
> Thanks,
>
>   - Antti
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Philipp Slusallek
> <Philipp.Slusallek at dfki.de <mailto:Philipp.Slusallek at dfki.de>> wrote:
>
>     Hi,
>
>     Sounds really good. I would suggest that we start defining the
>     WebComponent components and their interfaces soon (of course, based
>     on what you already use, but have a quick process to discuss if
>     there could be improvements) and then go from there. In parallel we
>     can check that XML3D works well with WebComponents and Polmer.
>
>     I believe we have talked about that a bit already but I am not sure
>     we have a specification for the WebComponents yet. Torsten, can you
>     work with whoever feels responsible on the Finish side to come up
>     with a common specification (somewhere on the private pages for now)?
>
>     Sounds like we are all working in the same direction -- which is
>     great! I can't wait to see the first avatars walking to Oulu city
>     (or some other place) in any Web browser :-).
>
>
>     Best,
>
>              Philipp
>
>     Am 03.11.2013 08:23, schrieb Toni Alatalo:
>
>         Again a brief note about a single point:
>
>         On 03 Nov 2013, at 09:12, Philipp Slusallek
>         <Philipp.Slusallek at dfki.de <mailto:Philipp.Slusallek at dfki.de>
>         <mailto:Philipp.Slusallek at __dfki.de
>         <mailto:Philipp.Slusallek at dfki.de>>> wrote:
>
>             Also there might be convenient components that would make 3D app
>             programming with XML3D and WebComponents much easier. So for
>             instance
>             having the XML3D-based components automatically define the
>             set of
>             variable that need to be synchronized, registering them with the
>             networking module (if available), and making sure this all
>             gets done
>             in the background would be excellent. Also providing an 3D
>             avatar
>             WebComponent with embedded animations and such would be
>             ideal. It
>             would be excellent if we could provide to Web developers a
>             whole set
>             of predefined and modular WebComponents that they could just
>             use to
>             create 3D worlds with behaviour.
>
>
>         This is what realXtend has been doing for several years — just
>         outside
>         the Web — and plan is to continue doing the same on the Web as
>         well :)
>
>         That’s how it works in the native Tundra, and plan for this
>         fi-ware work
>         to produce the web client (which also works standalone, like the
>         native
>         one does too) is to implement the same. That’s also how it works in
>         Chiru-WebClient and WebRocket, i.e. the pre-existing WebTundra’s.
>
>         ~Toni
>
>             The one really big issue where I still see a lot of work on
>             finding
>             new solutions (not just implementation but real conceptual
>             work) is
>             dealing with the hugely varying set of input devices. One
>             person has
>             mouse and keyboard, the next has only a multi-touch surface,
>             the next
>             is using a Kinect, while yet another other is using a Wii
>             Remote, etc.
>             A single Web app will have to work with all of those situations
>             simultaneously (on different devices, though). Letting Web
>             application
>             and their developers handle this in their apps will simply
>             not work
>             and be frustrating for developer and users.
>
>             We have started to work on a concept for this but this has
>             not gone
>             very far yet. The coarse idea is that applications use virtual
>             interaction elements to say what kind of input (metaphor)
>             they are
>             expected (e.g. selection of an object, moving an object).
>             These are
>             modules that can be configured and instantiated. They can
>             also be
>             nested within/on top each other (like non-visible dialog boxes)
>             dynamically to have a hierarchical finite state machine of
>             interactions.
>
>             These interaction elements would consist of the interaction
>             logic as
>             well as (optionally) some interaction gadgets that visually
>             represent
>             the possible interactions (like handles to move and rotate
>             an object).
>             The key thing is that these interaction elements would be
>             independent
>             of the application, anyone can use them, and we could
>             develop a whole
>             library of them to cover the wide range of input metaphors that
>             applications use (but applications can extend them with
>             their own if
>             needed).
>
>             There are two extensions to this approach: (i) instead of
>             having a
>             single interaction element for each interaction metaphor we
>             could have
>             interfaces for them and develop entire user interface
>             libraries that
>             each have a different look and feel but still implement the
>             same basic
>             interaction metaphor. (ii) One could also design them such
>             that users
>             can change the mapping of the devices used for certain
>             actions. Think
>             of it as a reconfigurable gamer mouse, where the user can assign
>             different action to certain buttons, gestures, or such. So a
>             user can
>             say, I will use the mouse to select objects but move them
>             with the
>             cursor keys (for a stupid simple example). These would be
>             optional
>             extensions for later, though.
>
>             It would be great to work on those aspects together if this
>             would be
>             interesting to anyone of you. You probably have quite some
>             experience
>             in terms of good UI for 3D games/apps. Identifying,
>             generalizing, and
>             implementing them as a reusable set of components would a
>             great step
>             forward for 3D apps on the Web (or elsewhere). This would
>             make great
>             papers for conferences as well!
>
>             If you want to go that way, we should probably set up a special
>             session for discussing this in more detail.
>
>
>             Best,
>
>             Philipp
>
>             Am 02.11.2013 17:35, schrieb Jonne Nauha:
>
>                 Yeah WebComponents are nice. I've already implemented
>                 quick tests for
>                 Tundras Entity and IComponent (common interface for all
>                 components,
>                 WebComponents has inheritance so it plays nicely into
>                 this) like 3-4
>                 months ago in our WebRocket web client. At that point I
>                 left it alone, I
>                 wanted to have my JS code that implements the component
>                 in a .js file
>                 not inside a .html polymer template. Currently I'm using
>                 requirejs for
>                 the whole repo as the amount of code and dependency
>                 tracking started to
>                 get out of hand, so I wanted a modular system where I
>                 can tell the
>                 system what each module needs as a dependency. This has
>                 been great but
>                 will make writing comp implementations in a WebComponent
>                 html template a
>                 bit trickier as it would expect everything to in global
>                 scope,
>                 requierejs effectively removes everything from global scope.
>
>                 I have also a simple DOM integration plugin for
>                 WebRocket. If you want
>                 to turn it on (configurable when you construct the
>                 client instance) it
>                 will mirror the whole scene/entity/component/__attribute
>                 chain in to the
>                 DOM as my own
>                 <scene><entity><component><__attribute/>...</component>...<__/entity>...</scene>
>                 nodes. This would be trivial to change to create XML3D
>                 nodes, but I cant
>                 test that out before everything on the asset side that
>                 has been
>                 discussed are complete. Because nothing would simply
>                 render if I wont
>                 provide the Ogre asset loaders for XML3D and it knowing
>                 how to used DDS
>                 textures. What I would prefer even more is to just pass
>                 you the geometry
>                 as data, because I have my own fully working AssetAPI to
>                 fetch the
>                 assets, and I have my own loaders for each asset type I
>                 support. I would
>                 kind of be duplicate work to re-implement then as XML3D
>                 loaders, when I
>                 alreayd have the ready typed gl arrays to give to you
>                 right now.
>
>                 For my current DOM "mirroring" plugin, if you manipulate
>                 the attributes
>                 in the DOM they wont sync up back to the in mem
>                 JavaScript attributes.
>                 So currently its read only. I haven't really had the
>                 need to implement
>                 the sync the other way as we are perfectly happy living
>                 in JS land and
>                 using the WebRocket SDK API to write our application
>                 logic. The
>                 declarative side is less important for Meshmoon
>                 WebRocket as the scenes
>                 are always coming from our Tundra based servers and not
>                 declared on the
>                 html page itself. For FIWARE the declarative and DOM
>                 side is more
>                 important and more in focus of course so I understand
>                 the direction of
>                 the talks and why XML3D is an valuable asset.
>
>                 Instantiating Scene, Entity and each of the Component
>                 implementation
>                 from a WebComponent template would solve this problem,
>                 as its designed
>                 to encapsulate the JS implementation and it has a great
>                 way to get
>                 callbacks when any attribute in the DOM node is
>                 manipulated. It can also
>                 expose DOM events and fire them, not to mention normal
>                 functions eg.
>                 $("<placeable>", entityNode).setPosition(10,20,__30); so
>                 you dont have to
>                 use the raw DOM api to set string attributes by random.
>                 These functions
>                 would have type checking and not let you put carbage
>                 into the
>                 attributes. I believe the attribute changed handler can
>                 also effectively
>                 abort the change if you are trying to put a boolean to a
>                 Vector3
>                 attribute. This all is great and would just require us
>                 WebRocket devs to
>                 port our current EC implementations to WebComponent
>                 templates.
>
>                 But here is where I get confused. So you would be fine by us
>                 implementing Tundra components as WebComponent templates
>                 (as said this
>                 would be fairly trivial). How would XML3D then play into
>                 this situation?
>                 Would it now monitor our DOM elements instead of the
>                 ones you specify
>                 (afaik eg. <group> <mesh>)? Can you open up this a bit?
>
>                 *UI and WebComponents*
>                 *
>                 *
>                 WebComponents are also being looked at in our 2D-UI GE,
>                 but to be frank
>                 there is very little to do there. The system is
>                 incredibly simple to
>                 use. You include polymer.js to you page, add <link> tags
>                 to your Polymer
>                 style .html templates, then you just use the tags
>                 declared in them on
>                 the markup or you create the DOM nodes during runtime
>                 from JS with your
>                 preferred method. I'm having a bit of hard time figuring
>                 out what we
>                 should focus on in the 2D part for WebComponents. I mean
>                 they are there
>                 and you can use them, you don't need any kind of special
>                 APIs or
>                 supporting code from our side for them to work. Only
>                 thing I can think
>                 of is implementing some widgets and maybe 3D related
>                 templates for
>                 anyone when they use WebTundra.
>
>                 Best regards,
>                 Jonne Nauha
>                 Meshmoon developer at Adminotech Ltd.
>                 www.meshmoon.com <http://www.meshmoon.com>
>                 <http://www.meshmoon.com/><htt__p://www.meshmoon.com
>                 <http://www.meshmoon.com>
>                 <http://www.meshmoon.com/>>
>
>
>
>                 On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 1:21 PM, Philipp Slusallek
>                 <Philipp.Slusallek at dfki.de
>                 <mailto:Philipp.Slusallek at dfki.de>
>                 <mailto:Philipp.Slusallek at __dfki.de
>                 <mailto:Philipp.Slusallek at dfki.de>><mailto:Philipp.__Slusallek at dfki.de
>                 <mailto:Philipp.Slusallek at dfki.de>>>
>
>                 wrote:
>
>                     Hi Toni, all,
>
>                     I have now looked at video on the main Polymer page
>                     (http://www.polymer-project.____org/
>                     <http://www.polymer-project.__org/
>                 <http://www.polymer-project.org/>>), which is actually
>                 very nicely
>                     done. They make a very good point why its
>                 advantageous to put things
>                     in the DOM compared to pure JS applications (or even
>                 Angular, which
>                     already uses the DOM). They highlight that with
>                 WebComponents
>                     (Polymer is a polyfill implementation of them) this
>                 becomes now even
>                     easier and creates an object-oriented aspect for HTML.
>
>                     BTW, this aspect is exactly what we were aiming at
>                 when we suggested
>                     the use of WebComponents for the 2D-UI Epic in the
>                 objectives of the
>                     FI-WARE Open Call and I think we should push even
>                 more in this
>                     direction, similar to what I wrote in response to
>                 Jonne's email
>                 earlier.
>
>                     Regarding the mapping: We already have the mapping
>                 of 3D to the DOM
>                     (XML3D) as well as many modules that build on top of
>                 that mapping
>                     (Xflow with animation, image processing, and AR;
>                 portable materials,
>                     etc.). I see no reason why we should throw this out
>                 just because
>                     there is a slightly different way of doing it.
>
>                     I would even speculate that if we would try to offer
>                 similar
>                     functionality that at the end we would end up with
>                 something that
>                     would pretty much resemble XML3D, maybe with a
>                 slightly different
>                     syntax. There are usually not many way to do the
>                 same thing in a
>                     good way.
>
>                     What I would support 100%, however, is that we try
>                 to use
>                     Web*Components* to implement the *ECA components*
>                 (and possibly
>                     entities). Essentially for the same reasons
>                 explained in the video.
>                     That makes a lot of sense in the Web context and is
>                 fully compatible
>                     with the DOM and all the DOM-based frameworks that
>                 can then be used
>                     as well on this data.
>
>                     I have been saying for a long time that we have had
>                 libraries in
>                     C/C++. Just porting them to JS to run in the Web
>                 does not give us
>                     any advantages at all (likely only disadvantages
>                 like performance
>                     and an inferior language). Its only if we embrace
>                 the key elements
>                     of the Web -- and the runtime DOM arguably is the
>                 core of it all --
>                     that we can tap into all the benefits of the Web.
>
>                     And THE key advantage of the DOM is that you get
>                 *way more* than the
>                     sum of the pieces when putting things together.
>                 Instead, of making
>                     sure that one library can talk to all the others
>                 (which gets you
>                     into an N^2 complexity problem), each component only
>                 needs to work
>                     with the DOM (constant effort per component and you
>                 have to deal
>                     with one data structure anyway, so its essentially
>                 no overhead
>                     anyway). Then, you get the benefit from all other
>                 components
>                     *automatically and completely for free* (jquery and
>                 all the other
>                     tools "just work" also with XML3D, and we should be
>                 able to use
>                     XML3D within Polymer also).
>
>                     Note, that none of the Web technologies discussed here
>                     (WebComponents, Polymer, Angular, etc.) would work
>                 at all if they
>                     would not use the DOM at their core. Angular for
>                 example depends on
>                     the DOM and just allows a nicer binding of custom
>                 functionality
>                     (controller implemented in JS) to the DOM.
>
>                     This all applies exactly the same way also to 3D
>                 data -- at least
>                     logically. However, on the implementation side 3D is
>                 special because
>                     you have to take care of large data structures,
>                 typed arrays, and so
>                     on. This is what the main work in XML3D was all
>                 about. Why should
>                     someone invest all the effort to do it again for
>                 likely very similar
>                     results in the end?
>
>                     We can talk about using three.js as a renderer,
>                 though, but I would
>                     not touch the 3D DOM binding and data model that we
>                 already have in
>                     XML3D (unless someone comes with very good reasons
>                 to do so).
>
>
>                     Best,
>
>                              Philipp
>
>
>                     Am 02.11.2013 09:27, schrieb Toni Alatalo:
>
>                         On 02 Nov 2013, at 09:09, Philipp Slusallek
>                         <Philipp.Slusallek at dfki.de
>                 <mailto:Philipp.Slusallek at dfki.de>
>                 <mailto:Philipp.Slusallek at __dfki.de
>                 <mailto:Philipp.Slusallek at dfki.de>><mailto:Philipp.__Slusallek at dfki.de
>                 <mailto:Philipp.Slusallek at dfki.de>>>
>
>                         wrote:
>
>                             Nice stuff. from my perspective there are
>                 two ways to look
>                             at this work: One is to provide high level
>                 UI elements on
>                             top of a three.js implementation and the
>                 other is the start
>                             of creating a declarative layer on top of
>                 the three.js
>                             renderer. This seems more along the first
>                 line but both
>                             should be similarly interesting to us.
>
>
>                         Indeed.
>
>                             It great to see that other people are coming
>                 up with similar
>                             ideas now. It would be good to get the
>                 message about our
>                             XML3D design and implementation to these
>                 people out there.
>                             That way we could improve what we already
>                 have instead of
>                             reinventing the wheel.
>
>
>                         That was my immediate first thought as well: it
>                 seemed like
>                         people have started to reinvent declarative 3d
>                 for the web from
>                         scratch. That’s why I asked whether they knew
>                 about the existing
>                         work — I understood that this Josh Galvin person
>                 (don’t know him
>                         from before) who made the Spinner demo, did (am
>                 not sure).
>
>                         Thanks for the views and pointers, I’ll keep an
>                 eye open for
>                         talks about this (actually just joined the
>                 #three.js irc channel
>                         on freenode yesterday, haven’t been involved in
>                 their community
>                         before really — Tapani from us has been hanging
>                 out there
>                         though). They seem to communicate most in the
>                 github issue
>                         tracker and pull requests (which I think is a
>                 great way).
>
>                         I also did not find an e-mail address to the
>                 polymer-threejs
>                         person, butkaosat.net <http://butkaosat.net>
>                 <http://kaosat.net/><http://__kaosat.net <http://kaosat.net>
>                 <http://kaosat.net/>> is his personal site
>
>                         and apparently he made the original announcement
>                 of the
>                         declarative three.js thing in August in Google+
>                 so I figure e.g.
>                         replying there would be one way to comment:
>                 https://plus.google.com/____112899217323877236232/posts/____bUW1hrwHcAW
>                 <https://plus.google.com/__112899217323877236232/posts/__bUW1hrwHcAW>
>
>                   <https://plus.google.com/__112899217323877236232/posts/__bUW1hrwHcAW <https://plus.google.com/112899217323877236232/posts/bUW1hrwHcAW>>
>                 ..
>                         I can do that on Monday.
>
>                         BTW it seems that this guy is into hardware and
>                 cad and all
>                         sorts of things and declarative 3d xml is just a
>                 side thing for
>                         fun, perhaps related to his work on some cad
>                 thing — is not like
>                         he’d be pursuing a career or a product or
>                 anything out of it.
>
>                         It seems like a straightforward mapping of the
>                 three.js API to
>                         xml elements: what I struggle to understand now
>                 is whether
>                         that’s a good abstraction level and how does it
>                 correspond to
>                         xml3d’s vocabulary.
>
>                         ~Toni
>
>                             It would be good if you can point people
>                 also to our papers
>                             from this year
>
>                   (http://graphics.cg.uni-____saarland.de/publications/
>                 <http://graphics.cg.uni-__saarland.de/publications/>
>
>                   <http://graphics.cg.uni-__saarland.de/publications/
>                 <http://graphics.cg.uni-saarland.de/publications/>>). They
>                             explain a lot of the background of why we
>                 have chose thing
>                             to work the way they work.
>
>                             More specifically:
>                             -- The "xml3d.js" paper explain a lot about
>                 the design of
>                             XML3D and its implementation
>
>                   (https://graphics.cg.uni-____saarland.de/2013/xml3djs-____architecture-of-a-polyfill-____implementation-of-xml3d/ <https://graphics.cg.uni-__saarland.de/2013/xml3djs-__architecture-of-a-polyfill-__implementation-of-xml3d/>
>
>                   <https://graphics.cg.uni-__saarland.de/2013/xml3djs-__architecture-of-a-polyfill-__implementation-of-xml3d/ <https://graphics.cg.uni-saarland.de/2013/xml3djs-architecture-of-a-polyfill-implementation-of-xml3d/>>).
>                             -- The "Declarative image processing" paper
>                 explains all the
>                             advantages one gets from exposing processing
>                 elements to the
>                             DOM instead of implementing them only in
>                 some JS libraries
>
>                   (https://graphics.cg.uni-____saarland.de/2013/declarative-____ar-and-image-processing-on-____the-web-with-xflow/ <https://graphics.cg.uni-__saarland.de/2013/declarative-__ar-and-image-processing-on-__the-web-with-xflow/>
>
>                   <https://graphics.cg.uni-__saarland.de/2013/declarative-__ar-and-image-processing-on-__the-web-with-xflow/ <https://graphics.cg.uni-saarland.de/2013/declarative-ar-and-image-processing-on-the-web-with-xflow/>>).
>                             -- And the 2012 paper on "XFlow" shows this
>                 usage for
>                             animation
>
>                   (https://graphics.cg.uni-____saarland.de/2012/xflow-____declarative-data-processing-____for-the-web/ <https://graphics.cg.uni-__saarland.de/2012/xflow-__declarative-data-processing-__for-the-web/>
>
>                   <https://graphics.cg.uni-__saarland.de/2012/xflow-__declarative-data-processing-__for-the-web/ <https://graphics.cg.uni-saarland.de/2012/xflow-declarative-data-processing-for-the-web/>>)
>
>                             Getting into a constructive discussion with
>                 some of these
>                             three.js people would be a good thing. I
>                 tried to find an
>                             email address for the polymer-threejs person
>                 but could not
>                             find any. Feel free to farward this email to
>                 him (and maybe
>                             others). I would love to get their feedback
>                 and engage in
>                             discussions.
>
>
>                             Best,
>
>                                      Philipp
>
>                             Am 02.11.2013 00:38, schrieb Toni Alatalo:
>
>                                 Apparently some three.js user/dev has
>                 gotten inspired by
>                                 WebComponents &
>                                 the Polymeer and written
>                 https://github.com/kaosat-dev/____polymer-threejs
>                 <https://github.com/kaosat-dev/__polymer-threejs>
>
>                   <https://github.com/kaosat-__dev/polymer-threejs
>                 <https://github.com/kaosat-dev/polymer-threejs>> :)
>
>                                 Now another guy has continued with
>                 https://github.com/JoshGalvin/____three-polymer
>                 <https://github.com/JoshGalvin/__three-polymer>
>
>                   <https://github.com/__JoshGalvin/three-polymer
>                 <https://github.com/JoshGalvin/three-polymer>> — there’s
>                                 a demo of custom
>                                 element (‘spinner’), similar to the Door
>                 case discussed
>                                 here earlier.
>
>                                 Had a brief chat with him, will return
>                 to this later but
>                                 was fun to see
>                                 the minimal webgl web component example
>                 there as that
>                                 has been in our
>                                 agenda.
>
>                                 ~Toni
>
>                                 01:01 *<* galv*>*
>                 https://github.com/JoshGalvin/____three-polymer
>                 <https://github.com/JoshGalvin/__three-polymer>
>
>                   <https://github.com/__JoshGalvin/three-polymer
>                 <https://github.com/JoshGalvin/three-polymer>> added
>                                 support for more basic geometry types
>                                 01:02 *<* galv*>* Going to do materials next
>                                 01:25 *<* *antont**>* galv: hee - are
>                 you aware of these
>                                 btw?
>                 http://www.w3.org/community/____declarative3d/
>                 <http://www.w3.org/community/__declarative3d/>
>
>                   <http://www.w3.org/community/__declarative3d/
>                 <http://www.w3.org/community/declarative3d/>> , e.g.
>                 https://github.com/xml3d/____xml3d.js
>                 <https://github.com/xml3d/__xml3d.js>
>                                 <https://github.com/xml3d/__xml3d.js
>                 <https://github.com/xml3d/xml3d.js>>
>                                 01:27 *<* galv*>* yeah, different level
>                 of abstraction
>                                 01:27 *<* *antont**>* perhaps
>                                 01:28 *<* galv*>* I expect people to
>                 wrap up their game
>                                 objects
>                                 01:28 *<* galv*>* aka "spinner"
>                                 01:28 *<* galv*>* (index.html)
>                                 01:29 *<* *antont**>* we've been also
>                 planning to enable
>                                 saying things
>                                 like <door> if that's what you mean
>                                 01:30 *<* *antont**>* right, seems like
>                 the same idea
>                                 01:31 *<* *antont**>* very cool to see,
>                 gotta check the
>                                 codes etc later
>                                 .. but sleep now, laters
>
>
>
>
>                   ___________________________________________________
>                                 Fiware-miwi mailing list
>                 Fiware-miwi at lists.fi-ware.eu
>                 <mailto:Fiware-miwi at lists.fi-ware.eu>
>                 <mailto:Fiware-miwi at lists.fi-__ware.eu
>                 <mailto:Fiware-miwi at lists.fi-ware.eu>>
>                                 <mailto:Fiware-miwi at lists.fi-__ware.eu
>                 <mailto:Fiware-miwi at lists.fi-ware.eu>>
>                 https://lists.fi-ware.eu/____listinfo/fiware-miwi
>                 <https://lists.fi-ware.eu/__listinfo/fiware-miwi>
>
>                   <https://lists.fi-ware.eu/__listinfo/fiware-miwi
>                 <https://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-miwi>>
>
>
>
>                             --
>
>
>                   ------------------------------____----------------------------__--__-------------
>                             Deutsches Forschungszentrum für Künstliche
>                 Intelligenz
>                             (DFKI) GmbH
>                             Trippstadter Strasse 122, D-67663 Kaiserslautern
>
>                             Geschäftsführung:
>                                Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Wolfgang
>                 Wahlster (Vorsitzender)
>                                Dr. Walter Olthoff
>                             Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats:
>                                Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes
>
>                             Sitz der Gesellschaft: Kaiserslautern (HRB 2313)
>                             USt-Id.Nr.: DE 148646973, Steuernummer:
>                   19/673/0060/3
>
>                   ------------------------------____----------------------------__--__---------------
>                             <slusallek.vcf>
>
>
>
>
>                     --
>
>
>                   ------------------------------____----------------------------__--__-------------
>                     Deutsches Forschungszentrum für Künstliche
>                 Intelligenz (DFKI) GmbH
>                     Trippstadter Strasse 122, D-67663 Kaiserslautern
>
>                     Geschäftsführung:
>                        Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Wolfgang Wahlster
>                 (Vorsitzender)
>                        Dr. Walter Olthoff
>                     Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats:
>                        Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes
>
>                     Sitz der Gesellschaft: Kaiserslautern (HRB 2313)
>                     USt-Id.Nr.: DE 148646973, Steuernummer:  19/673/0060/3
>
>                   ------------------------------____----------------------------__--__---------------
>
>                     _________________________________________________
>                     Fiware-miwi mailing list
>                 Fiware-miwi at lists.fi-ware.eu
>                 <mailto:Fiware-miwi at lists.fi-ware.eu>
>                 <mailto:Fiware-miwi at lists.fi-__ware.eu
>                 <mailto:Fiware-miwi at lists.fi-ware.eu>><mailto:Fiware-miwi at __lists.fi-ware.eu
>                 <mailto:Fiware-miwi at lists.fi-ware.eu>>
>                 https://lists.fi-ware.eu/__listinfo/fiware-miwi
>                 <https://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-miwi>
>
>
>
>
>             --
>
>             ------------------------------__------------------------------__-------------
>             Deutsches Forschungszentrum für Künstliche Intelligenz
>             (DFKI) GmbH
>             Trippstadter Strasse 122, D-67663 Kaiserslautern
>
>             Geschäftsführung:
>               Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Wolfgang Wahlster (Vorsitzender)
>               Dr. Walter Olthoff
>             Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats:
>               Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes
>
>             Sitz der Gesellschaft: Kaiserslautern (HRB 2313)
>             USt-Id.Nr.: DE 148646973, Steuernummer:  19/673/0060/3
>             ------------------------------__------------------------------__---------------
>             <slusallek.vcf>
>
>
>
>
>     --
>
>     ------------------------------__------------------------------__-------------
>     Deutsches Forschungszentrum für Künstliche Intelligenz (DFKI) GmbH
>     Trippstadter Strasse 122, D-67663 Kaiserslautern
>
>     Geschäftsführung:
>        Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Wolfgang Wahlster (Vorsitzender)
>        Dr. Walter Olthoff
>     Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats:
>        Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes
>
>     Sitz der Gesellschaft: Kaiserslautern (HRB 2313)
>     USt-Id.Nr.: DE 148646973, Steuernummer:  19/673/0060/3
>     ------------------------------__------------------------------__---------------
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Fiware-miwi mailing list
>     Fiware-miwi at lists.fi-ware.eu <mailto:Fiware-miwi at lists.fi-ware.eu>
>     https://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-miwi
>
>


-- 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deutsches Forschungszentrum für Künstliche Intelligenz (DFKI) GmbH
Trippstadter Strasse 122, D-67663 Kaiserslautern

Geschäftsführung:
   Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Wolfgang Wahlster (Vorsitzender)
   Dr. Walter Olthoff
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats:
   Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Kaiserslautern (HRB 2313)
USt-Id.Nr.: DE 148646973, Steuernummer:  19/673/0060/3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: slusallek.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 441 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-miwi/attachments/20131104/45a2bf97/attachment.vcf>


More information about the Fiware-miwi mailing list

You can get more information about our cookies and privacy policies clicking on the following links: Privacy policy   Cookies policy