Where Rev could be going...3D?

[Brian Yennie]

There are probably a dozen different angles on improving the API,  
however... my number one would be support for any sort of custom  
object. It's nearly impossible to maintain anything inside of a Rev  
window. Note that the guys at Altuit did a masterful job with  
altBrowser, but that it still technically lives in a separate,  
borderless window that's been hacked to stay pinned to your Rev  
stack. And from what I gather (and my own experiments), that itself  
is not an easy task.

I'd say this is the #1 reason why we don't see things like true table  
and tree objects that are absolutely accessible through C APIs -  
tacking it on to a Rev stack is a nightmare.

If the external SDK included a standard way of maintaining your own  
custom objects, that would be a huge boon to external developers...  
even if it wasn't totally comprehensive. I'd be at the front of the  
line personally to implement a true table object, for example.


> jbv wrote:
>> too bad all the time spent ranting on this list about
>> Rev missing features can't be used to code those
>> features instead...
>
> What changes would be needed to the externals API?
>
> -- 
>  Richard Gaskin
>  Fourth World Media Corporation
>  ___________________________________________________________
>  Ambassador at FourthWorld.com       http://www.FourthWorld.com
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your  
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
>
>